PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

In light of this new information. After the Liaoning left Dalian on 1 september she didn't return to port in Qingdao but stayed at sea the whole time. I'm going to adjust the sea trial roster.



Sea trails under shipyard

first sea trial (10 august 2011 – 13 august 2011) (3 days)
second sea trial (28 november 2011 – 10 december 2011) (12 days)
third sea trial (20 december 2011 – 29 december 2011) (9 days)
fourth sea trial (7 january 2012 – 16 january 2012) (9 days)
fifth sea trial (19 april 2012 – 30 april 2012) (11 days)
sixth sea trial (7 may 2012 – 16 may 2012) (9 days)
seventh sea trial (23 may 2012 – 1 june 2012) (9 days)
eighth sea trial (7 june 2012 – 21 june 2012 ) (14 days)
ninth sea trial (6 july 2012 – 30 july 2012) (24 days)
tenth sea trial (27 august 2012 – 30 august 2012) (3 days)

under shipyard total 103 days at sea in 1 year and 20 days

Sea trials under PLAN (commissioned on 25 september 2012)

first sea trial (11 october 2012 – 30 october 2012) (19 days)
second sea trail (12 november 2012 – 25 november 2012) (13 days)
third sea trial (11 june 2013 - 3 july 2013) (22 days)
fourth sea trial (15 august 2013 - 23 august 2013) (8 days)
fifth sea trial (1 september 2013 - 21 september 2013) (20 days)

under PLAN total 82 days at sea in 11 months and 26 days

total days at sea 185 days in 2 years and 1 month and 11 days

Bltizo said:

Well that's assuming J-15 cannot take off from the ski jump with MTOW.

But whether it can or not, the benefit of buddy refuelling will be invaluable.




That was a matter of necessity rather than design, and the PLAN will have access to z-8AEW and Ka-31 for liaoning which are much better suited for AEW although their operating altitude is somewhat lower.

Click to expand...

Helicopter AEW assets are seriously limited in physical range and endurance when compared to fixed wing AEW assets, to say nothing reduced capacity for actual mission equipment. Helicopter AEW could therefore use a lot more help than the likes of E-2.

In any case, a two seat J-15 can potentially provide limited AEW service over distant mission area, a capability even fixed wing AWACS would find challenging to match.

asif iqbal said:

In a 24 fleet carrier squadron how many do you think will be twin seat?

Click to expand...

Four to Six, brat

chuck731 said:

Helicopter AEW assets are seriously limited in physical range and endurance when compared to fixed wing AEW assets, to say nothing reduced capacity for actual mission equipment. Helicopter AEW could therefore use a lot more help than the likes of E-2.

Click to expand...

How does E-2 come into play when we are comparing the AEW capability of Z-8AEW and J-15?

Everyone knows helicopter based AEW has disadvantages compared to fixed wing, but the point is that J-15 or J-15S as it is won't add any meaningful AEW capability on top of what Z-8AEW offers.

In any case, a two seat J-15 can potentially provide limited AEW service over distant mission area, a capability even fixed wing AWACS would find challenging to match.

Click to expand...

I think we need to differentiate between AEW, AEW&C and just turning on one's radar.
J-15 can potentially survey a large mission area, yes, but it will lack the capability to disseminate that information across a wide variety of platforms which AEW&C platforms can conduct. It may be able to stay at a high altitude and have decent performance, but in that way what it is conducting is a CAP with an active radar, and not conducting an AEW&C function which involves a dedicated aircraft with a more powerful, wide area surveying radar, with the necessary processing and datalinking equipment not to mention personnel onboard.


Like you said, F-14s in Iranian service sometimes vectored planes in an "AEW&C" like fashion. During the third taiwan strait crisis PLAAF planners had considered using their limited number of flankers (with their relatively powerful radar at the time) to guide in shorter ranged, radar incompetent fighters like J-8s and J-7s and Q-5s, in a similar fashion.
Can J-15 do the same? Of course it can. But would it be necessary, optimal or standard practice to use it as a taskforce's AEW&C asset? No it wouldn't, because its capabilities will pale in comparison to that of the Ka-31 or Z-8AEW, because despite the latter two's inferior range and altitude, they still have far superior processing, datalinking, and human capability onboard to make sense of the radar picture. Not to mention both Ka-31 and Z-8AEW also have a radar which covers 360 degrees through mechanical rotation (not to mention being larger and thus more powerful), whereas J-15 can only survey the area where the nose is pointed.

Franklin said:

What we have seen in recent days J-15's loaded with anti-ship, ground attack weapons and a buddy refueling pod is that the PLAN is going to make the most of the Liaoning and the J-15 despite its shortcomings with regard to the ski jump. It has certainly help to clarify a few things and debunked a few myth's about how the Liaoning will be operated and its capabilities in the future.

Click to expand...

Buddy refueling pod aka Buddy store? I'm still looking for that photo or video. Please post...anyone! thanks.

bd popeye said:

Buddy refueling pod aka Buddy store? I'm still looking for that photo or video. Please post...anyone! thanks.

Click to expand...

Popeye, based on these pictures, they indicate a buddy store pod on the J-15.


The last three pics are of a very similar looking apparatus that is a supposedly a Russian refueling stores pod on SU-27 and SU-24 aircraft. Not definitive proof, but it looks like it could very well be.

It would be so exciting to see a J15S refuelling a J15! Wow

Bltizo said:

How does E-2 come into play when we are comparing the AEW capability of Z-8AEW and J-15?

Everyone knows helicopter based AEW has disadvantages compared to fixed wing, but the point is that J-15 or J-15S as it is won't add any meaningful AEW capability on top of what Z-8AEW offers.

Click to expand...

E-2 comes into play by exhibiting capabilities which Z-8 can not match, because Z-8 can not stay in the air for as long as E-2, is much slower and can not provide extended coverage by orbiting at some distance from the parent carrier as the E-2 can.

These shortcomings of the Z-8 in real combat environment can, however, be relieved up to a modest degree by addition of other platform with independent airborn search capability whose sensors can be datalinked with to the Z-8, or to a common tactical control center to which both the Z-8 and the other platform can link, especially if those other platform can fly much further from the carrier, and reach desired station quickly, as J-15 can. So if J-15 twin seat that can link its sensors to the Z-8, or to the CIC on the carrier, or if the backseater on the J-15 can perform some airborn analysis and control role, then J-18 twin seat could certainly supplement the limited capabilities of the Z-8.

Bltizo said:

Can J-15 do the same? Of course it can. But would it be necessary, optimal or standard practice to use it as a taskforce's AEW&C asset? No it wouldn't, because its capabilities will pale in comparison to that of the Ka-31 or Z-8AEW, because despite the latter two's inferior range and altitude, they still have far superior processing, datalinking, and human capability onboard to make sense of the radar picture. Not to mention both Ka-31 and Z-8AEW also have a radar which covers 360 degrees through mechanical rotation (not to mention being larger and thus more powerful), whereas J-15 can only survey the area where the nose is pointed..

Click to expand...

Straw man. I did not ask the J-15 twin seat to do the same, or provide any 360 degree coverage. I am asking whether J-15 twin seat can complement the limited capabilities of the Z-8 to a higher degree than could be trivially done by single seat J-15s, and therefore materailly add to a Chinese carrier's AWAC capability.

It is also not all together clear how much additional human capability is really there in the Z-8 or Ka-31, and to what degree these helicopters actually relies on data links with the parent carrier to perform its processing and command function. It is also not all together clear how much data link capabilities the J-15 twin seat has. It could well be that both Z-8 and Ka-31 relies heavily on the carrier for data processing and analysis, in which case J-15 would stand at little disadvantage provided it also has a high bandwidth data link capability.

E-2 was never part if the discussion because liaoning would never hold such aircraft anyway.
If bringing in E-2 is meant to demonstrate how inferior rotary winged AEW are, I have no problem. But using that to argue that fixed wing fighters can somehow supplement a helicopter based AEW doesn't make sense, because the whole point of AEW(&C) is wide area surveillance and control of multiple aircraft or other assets which a twin seater J-15 simply won't be able to do as well as a Z-8AEW because it lacks a 360 radar and it lacks the more powerful processing capability that the helicopters own crew offers.

Would j-15 perform CAP with active radars? Yes. Will it be able to datalink with other assets to some degree and share information? Yes. Does it have the ability to disseminate the data among a wide variety of assets and control multiple other aircraft? Doubtful. There is a further argument that Liaoning's limited fighter wing should be used for fighter tasks rather than struggling with AEW which Z-8AEW or ka-31 is better equipped for. And again E-2 doesn't figure into this because even though fixed wing AEW is better than rotary, assigning fighters with no modification to act as AEW doesn't compensate for any of the disadvantages rotary AEW has.

Further doubts regarding Ka-31 and Z-8AEW and their human crew capacity can be somewhat put to rest by comparing them with other similar systems like the UKs sea king AEW and the French horizon battlefield helicopter.
But even pretending rotary wing aircraft have a very small crew (I believe e-2 only has three consoles or somehong, how many can you fit in a Z-8?), J-15s still lack te radar of dedicated AEW choppers which are both more powerful, and can reliably survey 360 degrees without resorting to haphazard maneuvers to turn their nose everywhere like j-15 or any other fighter

My main point is that J-15 can be used in an AEW role for a CVBG, but the capability it provides over Z-8AEW or Ka-31 is doubtful, and considering the relatively small airwing of fighters on liaoning in the first place, would it really be wise assigning J-15s on an errant orbit around your fleet to have their radar cover all 360. (Not very efficient and won't have by the moment coverage either), meaning you are drawing fighters away from CAP or strike sorties?


Also, just how inferior are rotary wing AEW to fixed wing in terms of range and endurance? No doubt they are inferior in terms of altitude and speed, but it would be interesting to see what the differential is in the other two.
Also the processing and crew on Z-8AEW compared to E-2 would be interesting to note too.

A scenario for aew-needs