J-15 carrier fighter thread

[Jeff Head]

I wonder when this prototype, two-seat version of the J-15 will be produced in some numbers?

​

These are from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Just further evidence that the PLAN is adopting similar policies and planning to the US Navy type model, ie. F/A-18E single seat Super Hornet, and the two-seat, F/A-18F strike Super Hornet and E/A-18G Growler.

A two seat strike or EW variant of the J-15 would be a strong addition to the overall capabilities of the carrier.

 

[asif iqbal]

Jeff you have to include this amazing picture of the aerial refuelling J15 which really shows the commitment China is putting into this fighter

We have seen a twin seater and a aerial fuelling version so threes no doubt we will indeed see a EW version after all it will complete the package I look forward to it

 

[Solaris]

We have seen a twin seater and a aerial fuelling version so threes no doubt we will indeed see a EW version after all it will complete the package I look forward to it

Probably something like the EW pods that have been seen on the JH-7A. More impressive though would be something like a more dedicated EW platform like the Growler.

 

[siegecrossbow]

I wonder when this prototype, two-seat version of the J-15 will be produced in some numbers?

These are from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Just further evidence that the PLAN is adopting similar policies and planning to the US Navy type model, ie. F/A-18E single seat Super Hornet, and the two-seat, F/A-18F strike Super Hornet and E/A-18G Growler.

A two seat strike or EW variant of the J-15 would be a strong addition to the overall capabilities of the carrier.

Twin-seat J-15 is back to using WS-10s? Interesting development.

 

[Jeff Head]

Jeff you have to include this amazing picture of the aerial refuelling J15 which really shows the commitment China is putting into this fighter

I've seen a couple of versions of that pic, as follows:

​

..but I honestly do not know, because I am afraid they all may be PSs taken from this actual event:

​

Now, I know that that is an actual photo of "555" and "556" flying together and "556" is carrying the buddy stores apparatus with it for test in that pic. Did they actually use it to refuel? I do not know.

You can also see "556" flying in the following photo testing with it too:

​

No doubt that the PLAN will use buddy store refueling. And no doubt they are building a two-seat version of the J-15. So, I agree that the EW variant is almost a foregone conclusion.

But, we must see them actually produced!

Same with the J-15 itself at this point. I have actually seen photos of seven different prototypes, and up to four actual production aircraft flying around. But we need to see a dozen production aircraft onboard the Liaoning qualifying, and then see them begin adding the two-seat versions for quals. And see them doing refueling with their actual production aircraft.

Oh well, inventories are slowly building, and perhaps after this maintenance lay-up period they will. They are moving forward according to their own time table.

But the time will come, and I am anxiously awaiting it, when we will see something like this on the Liaoning's deck...five J-15s like these SU-33s would be a nice thing to see.

​

 

[Inst]

I don't believe it's yet been fully documented that J-15s can take-off with max load on positions 1 and 2 on the Liaoning. That's something I'd like to see, until then, I'd still take the position that the J-15s are crippled on ex-Varyag.

About the J-15 vs Super Hornet; the Super Hornet and the J-15s have approximately the same range. The Super Hornet is actually lighter than the J-15 when empty, however, so when loaded with payload the Super Hornet would likely have a lower range.

As to whether or not the J-15 is a credible force; no, I disagree on that. The Chinese CVBG force is embryonic, and cannot afford proper fleet protection to its own assets. Especially considering that by the time we reach 2020, several neighbors will have stealth aircraft, and that the J-15 is still a 4.5th generation aircraft, Liaoning-class CVs won't be effective against peer or near-peer opponents. Against unarmed or minimally armed opponents the Liaoning+J-15 combo might be effective, but a combination of stealth strike aircraft and carriers will make the Liaoning+J-15 combo minimally effective in a serious fight.

Against a credible foe, then, air superiority and fleet air protection needs to be provided by J-31/J-35s, relegating the J-15s to support functions like jamming, radar flashing, and non-stealth strike.

 

[Blitzo]

I don't believe it's yet been fully documented that J-15s can take-off with max load on positions 1 and 2 on the Liaoning.

Of course not. Considering the only navy that's operated a real STOBAR carrier in the last few decades has been underfunded and dilapidated,

That's something I'd like to see, until then, I'd still take the position that the J-15s are crippled on ex-Varyag.

Even if J-15s are limited by their TOWs on the ski jump and are only able to take off with a fraction of their MTOW, I'd hardly call that crippled.

Personally, I think it is fairest to reserve judgement as to how heavy a fighter a STOBAR carrier can launch until either side can prove evidence for or against it. And at this stage neither side has.

About the J-15 vs Super Hornet; the Super Hornet and the J-15s have approximately the same range. The Super Hornet is actually lighter than the J-15 when empty, however, so when loaded with payload the Super Hornet would likely have a lower range.

As to whether or not the J-15 is a credible force; no, I disagree on that. The Chinese CVBG force is embryonic, and cannot afford proper fleet protection to its own assets. Especially considering that by the time we reach 2020, several neighbors will have stealth aircraft, and that the J-15 is still a 4.5th generation aircraft, Liaoning-class CVs won't be effective against peer or near-peer opponents. Against unarmed or minimally armed opponents the Liaoning+J-15 combo might be effective, but a combination of stealth strike aircraft and carriers will make the Liaoning+J-15 combo minimally effective in a serious fight.

Against a credible foe, then, air superiority and fleet air protection needs to be provided by J-31/J-35s, relegating the J-15s to support functions like jamming, radar flashing, and non-stealth strike.

PLAN carriers won't seriously be used against a credible peer competitor without the complement of other A2AD infrastructure in the westpac, at least not for the near term. They'll do their job of organic air cover, and opportunistic longer range strike and anti shipping missions, and if CATOBAR carriers are developed, fixed wing AEWC for the taskforce. But Unless the PLAN are somehow able to concentrate three or more operable carriers at one time, their carrier force will not decisively carry the PLA's military strategy against competent militaries in the westpac (let alone in blue water)

But against a lesser opponent, carriers do their job of projecting some degree of power, and J-15 (even if it is limited by TOW) will be enough for that.

 

[FORBIN]

New numbers to Hui Tong

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-15 production with prototypes and pre-series definitely
2011 4
2012 8
2013 8
2014 6
2015 4
2016 4

Seems good ?

 

[vesicles]

New numbers to Hui Tong

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-15 production with prototypes and pre-series definitely
2011 4
2012 8
2013 8
2014 6
2015 4
2016 4

Seems good ?

So does the mean the PLAN already has at least 20 J-15s?

 

[delft]

New numbers to Hui Tong

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-15 production with prototypes and pre-series definitely
2011 4
2012 8
2013 8
2014 6
2015 4
2016 4

Seems good ?

No. The reference shows:

Batch of J-15 is entering the service with PLAN carrier-borne fighter regiment. These aircraft carry a 3-digit serial number and painted with a PLAN flag as well as a "flying shark" insignia.

S/N
100
102
103
104
--Last Updated 5/18/2014

Where did you get the remainder of the information? It seems unlikely to me.