PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

PanAsian said:

I have to agree with everything stated so far about why an aircraft carrier DOES NOT benefit China. The PLAN should focus on developing first rate destroyers/frigates, subs, and start working on LPH/LPDs, at least these can be used for humanitarian missions and peacekeeping other than contributing in a Taiwan scenario. Probably some faction of the PLAN fancies an aircraft carrier for vanity which is why the Varyag is in Dalian. Hopefully more practical policies will prevail, anything beyond using the Varyag for R&D I think would be resources wasted.

There is no challenger at all to the Japanese MSDF, not South Korea, there was barely one when the Soviets were around. Japan does need that force for independent self-defence though as it has to maintain sea lanes open as a trading island nation with few natural resources. PLAN should learn from the JMSDF force structure!

By the way I have never noticed swimmerXC's picture before, nice kitty!

Click to expand...

ff

PLAN did not fancy an aircraft carrier, they are more focus on Submarine. Actually in the early 90s, the PLAN was split into two groups. One group is for Sub, and other for the Carrier. In the end of day, the Sub group won, so nowadays chinese have bigger acheivement in Sub. PLAN did brought some old Carriers back to study, but only for Varyag, they tried to do something about it. I agree that it is much wiser for PLAN just to study R&D, but you have to take into consideration that PLAN might needs to go all the way in order to gain full acknowledge about Carriers.

Please stop the call about what should PLAN do, the mods here already states we should not go offtopic. You might consider Peacekeeper and Japanese self defence force structure good fit for PLAN. But I doubt PLAN will restrict themselves to only self denfence capability, many chinese posters might also offense for your implication and we will have endless arguement.

Let all of us stay on Carriers, but not what should and what Shouldn't PLAN do.

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

Does China need a carrier? Perhaps not..
Does US navy need a carrier? Perhaps not...
Do we need any kind of weapons? certainly not, but reality is what it is...

....and in that China is heading for global power status, a superpower's cape for its shoulders and you need a power projection capapility in whitstanding that status...

And even for a regional power, china requires a blue water navy, and blue water navy in todadays world, ever since WWII needs aircraft carriers, or lets say a true sea based air power. There is little question of that. Sub marines and minor surface combatants can handle in smaller players, but to face opponents that China migth have to confront, you need supermacy of levels that little rubber ducks arent sufficent enough any longer. I think there is little guestion about chinese political goals and doctrines and even less things to consider about naval strategies so lets stop arguing about this, couse there isent anything to argue about.
This thread is dedicated to Varyag, not for speculations wheter china needs carrier or not. it has been said so many times in here before, but lets say it one more time; Carrier qualification doesent come over nigth since your first carrier hits water, its bainstakingly long road to go all by your own and China really hasent got anymore time to waste

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

swimmerXC said:

Here's something that will knock it back to topic...

Click to expand...

Swimmer...what is the essence of the article you scanned and posted the pics of? Basically, what does it say?

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

Gollevainen said:

in that China is heading for global power status, a superpower's cape for its shoulders and you need a power projection capapility in whitstanding that status...This thread is dedicated to Varyag, not for speculations wheter china needs carrier or not. it has been said so many times in here before, but lets say it one more time; Carrier qualification doesent come over nigth since your first carrier hits water, its bainstakingly long road to go all by your own and China really hasent got anymore time to waste

Click to expand...

I agree Gollevainen. For all of the reasons you mention, I still believe the PLAN intends to field not only a carrier, but an entire carrier battle group. They are acquiring and training with all of the other components. I still expect to see, sometime in the next five years or so, something like the following plowing the China and South China Seas:

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

Rumour time:
中国航母舰载机方案最终敲定SU-33战机沈飞制造据悉随着中囯首艘航空母舰方案的快速推进实施,中囯人民解放军总装备部决定于2007年开始陆续装备俄罗斯建造的SU-33舰载战斗机,新年过后SU-33舰载机引进方案已最终敲定,由现在负责生产SU-27战斗机(中国称;歼-11)的沈阳飞机制造公司,负责引进一条俄罗斯SU-33舰载战斗机生产线完成工装制造,而后将全部实现国产化.目前SU-33的设计图纸已经进入沈飞.06年是沈飞技术改造年,为了配合SU-33舰载机项目和新一代重型歼击机的设计制造任务,囯家将拨16亿巨资,用以提升改造沈飞目前所有科研生产制造工艺技术设施.界时沈飞的研发制造能力将提高到一个展新的水平,据悉,07年中囯人民解放军装备的SU-33舰载战机性能,将完全超过俄罗斯海军航空母舰现在所使用的SU-33 战机性能,中方提出的标准是SU-33除了保留原有航母起降战机的技术性能外,其它空战技术性能要求接近SU-35,另据外界权威情报机构分析;为了有效确保SU-33舰载机队正常战损的补充能力及各军种空军战时战术配合支援,届时解放军空军将新组5个SU-33舰载机陆基预备中队,海军航空兵将有8个SU-33舰载机陆基预备中队.平时可定期在[瓦良格]上进行训练换防,共同完成战备值班.美Fisher）声称，2005年的许多迹象显示，中国大陆有意建造航空母舰,费学礼说，在去年夏天莫斯科航空展中，中国曾与俄罗斯讨论采购苏 -33舰载机事宜。费学礼还说;在莫斯科航空展之前，大陆访团曾参观建造“库兹涅佐夫”级航空母舰的造船局,俄罗斯公司人员并证实，大陆海军有意购买俄罗斯Kamov公司的卡-31AEW雷达预警直升机.

From one of the Chinese boards, stating the following:
1. China has decided on the fighter for the Carriers
2. The fighter will be su-33.
3. China wishes to begin production of su-33 starting in 2007
4. China wants to purchase a su-33 production line and produce su-33 from SAC (who is currently licensed producing su-27)
5. the su-33 blueprint is already sent to SAC
6. China granted 1.6 billion RMB to SAC this year for su-33 and the development of 5th generation fighter
7. The su-33 equipping Chinese carrier is going to be superior in every aspect of performance to the ones equipping the current Russian carrier
8. I don't even feel like posting the rest. It reads less and less likely the more I read it. Although the part about ka-31 does sound likely.

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

swimmerxc..How about a translation on that article? thanks for finding that. Outstanding. Excellent picture. Nice "PS"?..Maybe not

Maybe some more pics will "suddenly appear" on the internet. Anybody near Dailan got a working camera?????

I also agree with Gollevainen.

Su-33's on the ship? I would have bet on Mig-29's simply because that's what the IN is recieving. Too bad for the PLAN a better ASW helo is aparently not avaliable.

Hey I say: Go China!!!!:china:
Strut your stuff!

Keep smilin'

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

bd popeye said:

swimmerxc..How about a translation on that article? thanks for finding that. Outstanding. Excellent picture. Nice "PS"?..Maybe not
Keep smilin'

Click to expand...

My Chinese vocab is limited to 100 common characters..
So I wouldn't really know what they are taking about :rofl:
Maybe one of the Chinese members (that know Chinese) can translate it.. but judging from the pic, it's a bunch of Chinese people in Russia probably inspecting carriers?

Re: Latest Varyag Pics

I mentioned before in AFM that the development of the Su-33UB (Su-27KUB) is suspicious.

It was introduced at a time (1999) when the Russians pretty much shrank their own carriers and literally left the Su-33s stationed inland. So why introduce a new type, and one intended for training? Who are they expect to train? There seems to be no signs after all these years that the Russians want to revigorate their carrier air arm.

The plane was testing the Zhuk-MSE radar, which was being planned for the Su-30MK3 intended for the PLAAF.

Lately, its got TVC nozzles and Zhuk-MSFE phase array radar.

I don't know about the SAC doing the J-11/Su-33 thingie. SAC would be lucky if they can make the J-11B come out in time, much less try to develop a carrier based version of it. The Su-33 requires a lot of mods on the J-11. Perhaps that is where those posted reports on this forum about China's alleged interest on Su-33 mods.

The question is, is it better to just buy Su-33MKKs from the Russians or develop one on your own? The latter improves your technological ability no doubt, but it is also reinventing the wheel. There is so many changes you have to do like putting canards or TVC to shorten the takeoff, and strengthening the landing gear. I don't suppose canards is a problem given the J-10 experience though. Personally I think China, SAC, KnAAPO and Sukhoi should sit down and talk things through.

Defending the Varyag with a SAM won't be much of a problem. It seems like that the radars on the 052C might provide the technology, funny that some say there is also a Ukrainian connection to these radars ala the Kvanti. I think it may be too big to put HHQ-9s though, though I can see Type 730 CIWS.

Re: Video of how SU-33 could work off of a PLAN carrier

bd popeye said:

Everytime I see the Russian CV viedos It just looks like the flight deck is devoid of action. But I know this thread is not about comparisons

Click to expand...

I couldnt agreed anymore. Its almost sad watching the "pride" of the Northern Fleet when she is out of harbor.

bd popeye said:

The flying of the Su-33 does look awesome though. The few Naval avaitors that the Russians do have are very skilled...

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I agree on you there. The few pilots actually with carrier experience lack training. On the last big sortie this autumn, one of their most experience Flanker-D pilot crashed his plane during landing, with the plane skewing off the deck and sunk 3000m. The pilot survived though. This proves the pilots lacks training in every way when it comes to carrier operations.

bd popeye said:

And why is the IN buying Mig-29's and not Su-33's?

Click to expand...

Simple. The much smaller Kiev class would have a hard time launching the much bigger Flanker-D. Size is probarly also a important factor.

Jeff Head said:

However, if they got a chance to load those SU-33's up for bear...and went after something, they would represent a considerable threat.

Click to expand...

But the n again; without a catapult system it would be impossible to load the planes with full weapons load and still be able to launch them up in the air. Therefore, the most common weapon load on Flanker-Ds are 2x Archers and (if lucky) 2x Adders. Getting the projected airborne carried Moskit on a carrier-based Flanker-D is out of the question.

tphuang said:

24 maybe? The other regiment will be based on shore and used as a strike aircraft. They can be used to replace the ones on Varyag. They also could be used for a future carrier. My opinion is that China will eventually have a carrier per fleet, so at least 75 carrier fighters are needed.

Click to expand...

As for the numbers carried, I think something like 24-30 is a realistic amount. Considering the size of the planes and the small hangar space provided on the Kuznetsov/Varyag, I doubt all of these planes would be able to fit underdeck. Therefore some of the big planes would have to be carried permanently overdeck.
Is this standard in the US Navy?



Example of the cramped conditions with the big Flanker-D in the underdeck hangar:


I'm not entirely sure of the actual length and width of the hangar, but this pics illustrates that the hangar aint too long, and will therefore have a hard time to house 24-30 large planes like the Flanker-D:


Now, question is: Will the PLAN get rid of the Shipwreck launcher in the forward deck to give more room for a large hangar deck?

MiGleader said:

it dependes on when china plans to start operating it's carrier. If its soon, the su-33kub is the best choice. almost not real trials would be needed since the fighter can operate off of varyag without modifications.

Click to expand...

Not to be negative, but have you seen the Su-33UB actually taking of from the deck with a valuable weapon load?

No? I thought so...

Re: Video of how SU-33 could work off of a PLAN carrier

Now, question is: Will the PLAN get rid of the Shipwreck launcher in the forward deck to give more room for a large hangar deck?

Click to expand...

What use are these if PLAN does not have Shipwrecks? So there is no point for having the launcher is there?

.