PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

I

i.e.

Senior Member
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

Bltizo said:
Wow that sucks. :(

Wrt to buddy refueling, does the planaf or plaaf have such a system? I can't imagine it would be too difficult to develop though...
Click to expand...

can;t believe the pro-"particular nation" slant over there...
but anyways,..,

yes I saw an system once.
same set up from from UK's Flight Refuelling Ltd.
 
SinoSoldier

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

Centrist said:
I don't think the J-15 is on par with the F-18E. It is much better than the Su-33 though. I doubt that the engines, avionics, radar signature reductions (if there are any) on the J-15 are near F-18E level. I would hold off on that until we know more.
Click to expand...

The avionics comparison will have to depend on the AESA radar installed on the J-15.

Radar signature reductions are not visible on the J-15 airframe (for example, no canted vertical stabilizers), but it is very possible that a certain level of RAM has been applied (like the J-11B airframes).

The WS-10A engines initially used on the J-15 provide more thrust than the F414-GE-100, although it has a lower thrust to weight ratio (7.5 compared to 9). However, if the J-15 does use thrust vectoring engines in the future like the Chinese military official said, then it would offer a maneuverability advantage over the F/A-18E.

The Chinese military official that commented on the J-15 put its performance on par with the F/A-18E/F and the Rafale-M. Even though we don't know much about the subsystems on the J-15, the official's comments at least give us a general idea of its performance.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

SinoSoldier said:
The avionics comparison will have to depend on the AESA radar installed on the J-15.

Radar signature reductions are not visible on the J-15 airframe (for example, no canted vertical stabilizers), but it is very possible that a certain level of RAM has been applied (like the J-11B airframes).

The WS-10A engines initially used on the J-15 provide more thrust than the F414-GE-100, although it has a lower thrust to weight ratio (7.5 compared to 9). However, if the J-15 does use thrust vectoring engines in the future like the Chinese military official said, then it would offer a maneuverability advantage over the F/A-18E.

The Chinese military official that commented on the J-15 put its performance on par with the F/A-18E/F and the Rafale-M. Even though we don't know much about the subsystems on the J-15, the official's comments at least give us a general idea of its performance.
Click to expand...

What do you think of the comment that the AESA used on the J-15 is an enlarged version of the one used on the J-10B? I ran across this bit of info when I did a translation of a Chinese forum post.

Also you didn't happen to quote Zhang Zhao Zhong when you said that a Chinese military commenter, right?
 
SinoSoldier

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

siegecrossbow said:
What do you think of the comment that the AESA used on the J-15 is an enlarged version of the one used on the J-10B? I ran across this bit of info when I did a translation of a Chinese forum post.

Also you didn't happen to quote Zhang Zhao Zhong when you said that a Chinese military commenter, right?
Click to expand...

It may be possible that the Chinese have developed different variants of one AESA radar rather than develop an AESA for each different fighter. These different variants would be configured according to fighter size, roles, and cost. However, the J-20 and other 5th generation fighter projects would have to use a more advanced one.

One of the military officials that commented on the J-15 was Lei Qiang: 雷强.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

SinoSoldier said:
It may be possible that the Chinese have developed different variants of one AESA radar rather than develop an AESA for each different fighter. These different variants would be configured according to fighter size, roles, and cost. However, the J-20 and other 5th generation fighter projects would have to use a more advanced one.

One of the military officials that commented on the J-15 was Lei Qiang: 雷强.
Click to expand...

If Lei Qiang commented on it then it is probably very reliable. I wonder if he got to testfly J-15 before he retired.
 
FarkTypeSoldier

FarkTypeSoldier

Junior Member
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

Jeff Head said:
The Varyag is capable of carrying up to 24 or more J15s (if the PLAN wants to), so having a couple operate in a buddy store role for the formation of the strike group is not so terrible an anty to pay for the potential capability it could give, particularly when those buddy store aircraft can then land and be reconfigured for the air defense role.
Click to expand...

Can it include a few more J-15 in storage hangars?
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: PLAN's first Carrier Strike Fighter the J-15 Flying shark

FarkTypeSoldier said:
Can it include a few more J-15 in storage hangars?
Click to expand...
This class carrier is technically capable of carrying more, however I doubt that they will max it out to that extent because there are other missions and roles that various helos (SAR, ASW, and AEW) will work at, and potential other fixed wing aircraft at some point that may operate off of her. So, though they could feasibly carry up to 36 maybe, I doubt they would ever carry more than 24, and probably will normally carry less than that (12-18).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top