PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Air Force Brat

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Bltizo said:
... Yet those are both limitations as serious, if not more so, than the number of qualified pilots PLAN has, in relation to the liaoning's ability to operate large numbers of aircraft.

Otherwise you can argue the number of qualified pilots isn't a limitation either, because that can be slowly improved just by training more of them.





Definitely true, for instance the F-22 has a cockpit with 4 individual screens instead of a panoramic display like the F-35 or advanced super hornet, or even the 3 large screens of J-10B and JF-17, but we should really use a common metric to compare them, and bringing in the invisible software component is a way to retain a sense that an inferior looking cockpit may not reflect its true combat potential.
So based purely on looks, it appears J-15's cockpit is a virtual transplant of J-11B's 5 mfd layout.
Click to expand...

Well for what its worth, the pilots aren't the limitation, they seem to be coming along nicely, and making good progress, with only two or three birds available, and cruise time of the Liaoning limited, likely the LRIP process of the J-15 continues to grind along, it will take awhile to ramp it up to speed, with the presidents recent visit, the money will very likely come soon. The main issue is limited cruise time on the Liaoning, and until that aspect of the equation is brought up to speed by the first indigenous carrier, we will just have to be patient.

As for the J-15 cockpit, I am really no fan of CRTs all over the place, and they are most definitely going to be challenged in a Naval aircraft environment, as all the speculation as to why the J-15 looked dirty????? A salt water environment is a challenge for any equipment, the pilots manage the J-15 well, and I am quite sure they are thrilled to be flying a new airplane, and one in the developmental stages at that. When/If the J-31 comes along, it will be state of the art as far as avionics, and hopefully will be equipped with the WS-13, but as Master Jeff and BD remind us along with others, these things take time..Brat
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Deino said:
Via Jane's

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Well, the Jane's Fighting Ship 2013 entry for the Liaoning is interesting, but also has some errors.

For example, here's what Jane's lists for defensive weaponry:

Janes Fighting Ships 2013 said:
Missiles: SAM: 4 FL-3000N 24-cell launchers 1 ; passive IR/ anti-radiation homing to 9.0 km (4.8 n miles).

Guns: 2—30 mm Type 1030 2 ; 10 barrels per mounting; 4,200 rds/min combined to 1.5 km.
Click to expand...


Well, actually, those are 18-cell FL-3000N launchers, not 24 cell.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Also, there are actually three CIWS guns on the Liaoning, not two, and they are eleven barrel guns, not ten barrel.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Here are the locations of the various weapons systems and sensors on the Liaoning:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Hehehe, Jane's...please contact some of us out here on these matters before committing such info to print in those HUGE books and in the PDFs that cost and arm and a leg.
 
Last edited:
kwaigonegin

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Jeff Head said:
Well, the Jane's Fighting Ship 2013 entry for the Liaoning is interesting, but also has some errors.



Hehehe, Jane's...please contact some of us out here on these matters before committing such info to print in those HUGE books and in the PDFs that cost and arm and a leg.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it.. I still have a couple volumes of my Jane's Fighting Ships that I think I paid like $300 EACH for if I remember!!! They've moved with me probably over half a dozen times in the past 15 years.
I've been wanting to throw them away but can't let go!! LOL! and to think that I can get more accurate info faster and pretty much free nowadays...
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
kwaigonegin said:
Tell me about it.. I still have a couple volumes of my Jane's Fighting Ships that I think I paid like $300 EACH for if I remember!!! They've moved with me probably over half a dozen times in the past 15 years.
I've been wanting to throw them away but can't let go!! LOL! and to think that I can get more accurate info faster and pretty much free nowadays...
Click to expand...
Last post on this OT for me, though if you consider the entries these books have for the Chinese vessels and the Liaoning in particular, it's somewhat related.

I have always fouind that the US Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the world to be the better work, though both atre volumous and have a lot of info and detail. I just find less errors in the USNI work.

They just came out with a new edition in August:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Nice thing about the USNI is that as a member you get a big discount. It's usually $295.00 but as a member you get the same book for $191.95. I bought one about 20 years ago (when it was $200 for non-members and $125 for members), and have kept it with me ever since. I'm due for a new one and we will get it this fall.

For those only interested in US vessels, but a comprehensive review of them, the USNI also has the:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

It's 688 pages, also a hard back and was published in March of this year. The non-member cost is $130.00 anf for members it's $84.95.

Anyhow, good books for any Naval enthusiast.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Intrepid said:
With a wingspan of nearly 25 meters they need a large runway. Most space on an aircraft carriers deck is the reserved space for take off and landing.
Click to expand...
All the more reason to make that runway as short as possible. And to make the deck as wide as possible.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
chuck731 said:
If the photos of a y-7 based AWAC with E-2 like quadruple vertical tail surfaces circulating on the internet indeed show something intended for Chinese carriers, as most observers seem to assume, then there will be aircraft a good deal larger than E-2 on Chinese carrier. The Y-7 is 25 meter long and has unfolded wing span of 30 meters.

It would be interesting to know if a reasonably heavily loaded y-7 could take off with a 180-200 meter ground roll in 30 knot head wind, or if it could with reasonably uprated engines. If so, then this AEW aircraft could be intended for the liaoning. Otherwise it must be intended for a catapult equipped follow on to the Liaoning. A JATO pack would seem rather dangerous for this purpose.
Click to expand...
Developing an AWAC from Y-7 doesn't make sense as the loads on the air frame during take off and landing are very much larger. This aircraft must be an aerodynamic test bed to understand the flow about the tail surfaces. This aircraft therefore doesn't indicate the dimensions of the operational aircraft.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Air Force Brat said:
Well for what its worth, the pilots aren't the limitation, they seem to be coming along nicely, and making good progress, with only two or three birds available, and cruise time of the Liaoning limited, likely the LRIP process of the J-15 continues to grind along, it will take awhile to ramp it up to speed, with the presidents recent visit, the money will very likely come soon. The main issue is limited cruise time on the Liaoning, and until that aspect of the equation is brought up to speed by the first indigenous carrier, we will just have to be patient.

As for the J-15 cockpit, I am really no fan of CRTs all over the place, and they are most definitely going to be challenged in a Naval aircraft environment, as all the speculation as to why the J-15 looked dirty????? A salt water environment is a challenge for any equipment, the pilots manage the J-15 well, and I am quite sure they are thrilled to be flying a new airplane, and one in the developmental stages at that. When/If the J-31 comes along, it will be state of the art as far as avionics, and hopefully will be equipped with the WS-13, but as Master Jeff and BD remind us along with others, these things take time..Brat
Click to expand...
Hoi Bray, CRT's? Cathode Ray Tubes? These are really old fashioned and I'm sure aren't used in J-15.
 
kwaigonegin

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Jeff Head said:
Last post on this OT for me, though if you consider the entries these books have for the Chinese vessels and the Liaoning in particular, it's somewhat related.

I have always fouind that the US Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the world to be the better work, though both atre volumous and have a lot of info and detail. I just find less errors in the USNI work.

They just came out with a new edition in August:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

Nice thing about the USNI is that as a member you get a big discount. It's usually $295.00 but as a member you get the same book for $191.95. I bought one about 20 years ago (when it was $200 for non-members and $125 for members), and have kept it with me ever since. I'm due for a new one and we will get it this fall.

For those only interested in US vessels, but a comprehensive review of them, the USNI also has the:


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

​

It's 688 pages, also a hard back and was published in March of this year. The non-member cost is $130.00 anf for members it's $84.95.

Anyhow, good books for any Naval enthusiast.
Click to expand...

guess what ? I have that too !! HAHAHAHA! man.. and I also subscribed to Proceedings and Navy Times etc.... ok DID.. now I just subscribe to Popular Mechanics and Readers Digests and a couple others! pretty soon I'l be subscribing to Home and Garden, Birds and Bloom and Southern Living. Allright maybe not quite yet but shoot me when or if I do.
 
Intrepid

Intrepid

Major
delft said:
All the more reason to make that runway as short as possible.
Click to expand...
Carrier runways became longer and longer for safety reasons. Less ramp strikes and less bolters with their high risk at low airspeed. To land a Vigilante at the short Forrestal-strip or even a Phantom on the poststamp-like deck of HMS Eagle isn't state of the art any longer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top