PLAN Carrier Operations..News, Videos & Photos II

Originally Posted by Engineer

I think the fact that even USN is moving on to AESA speaks volume.

Oh yeah, they are deploying AESA on the Flight III of Arleigh Burke, but it won't be ready until 2016.

alright, let's stop this AESA vs PESA argument.

There is nothing wrong with Liaoning installing type 346 radar and there is nothing wrong with American carriers installing its own radar. Even if they don't, the supporting fleet and all of the air wing carriers sensors that are just as important in a carrier group's operation.

Let's move on from this.

tphuang is a super moderator Obey all moderator instructions.

I just deleted the last three or four post in which members decided to continue the argument about radar. Right now I'm going to close this thread for 24 hours to allow members to cool off and re-focus on the PLAN CV-16 Liaoning. I know many member just want a good conversation & information posted about CV-16. Not a lot of silly and off topic argument.

This thread is CLOSED for 24 hours. It shall re-open at 1300 GMT 11.02.2012.

Thread open. Follow the instructions of all moderators. Post within the parameters of the forum rules.

FORUM RULES: Things to Remember Before Posting, important, please read!

bd popeye super moderator

The J-31 is suppose to be carrier-capable, and may even be carried by the Liaoning. But, has anyone ever published credible studies on what folding wings do to RCS? How stealthy can seams along the fold really be? One might think that section's radar absorbing material would have to be repainted after every takeoff and landing. It's true landing gear and weapon bays also open and close frequently, but those edges are sawtooth-ed and the geometry is better for RCS reduction while wing folds aren't.

Originally Posted by Blackstone

The J-31 is suppose to be carrier-capable, and may even be carried by the Liaoning. But, has anyone ever published credible studies on what folding wings do to RCS? How stealthy can seams along the fold really be? One might think that section's radar absorbing material would have to be repainted after every takeoff and landing. It's true landing gear and weapon bays also open and close frequently, but those edges are sawtooth-ed and the geometry is better for RCS reduction while wing folds aren't.

They might not need to fold wing after all.

Yes, it will take up lots of space and reduce the amount of fighter planes carry but it will compensate with its deep strike rdar evading abilities to take out enemies radar/sensor.

I suspect, its best to have a combination of J-15/15S forming the bulk of carrier fleet as workhorsewhile J-31 will onboard in certain numbers to act as forerunner in first wave assault.

Interesting video.. start the video at 3:44..

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Interesting video.. start the video at 3:44..

im impressed with his chinese pronunciations... not perfect, but impressive none the less

Originally Posted by Lion

They might not need to fold wing after all.

Yes, it will take up lots of space and reduce the amount of fighter planes carry but it will compensate with its deep strike rdar evading abilities to take out enemies radar/sensor.

I suspect, its best to have a combination of J-15/15S forming the bulk of carrier fleet as workhorsewhile J-31 will onboard in certain numbers to act as forerunner in first wave assault.

Actually J-31 will likely fly top cover over the fleet in an A2A role, not saying it couldn't accompany a strike group to take out enemy air, but its primary mission will be to interdict incoming aircraft/cruise missles.
But I do agree that it need not have folding wings given its petite size in relation to J-15s etc.

Tags: Chinese aircraft carrier; Liaoning; deck markings; imgur; sailing; sea trial;

Andrew Erickson is one of US's best China analysts, due in no small part to his excellent command of Chinese. He represents a new generation of China analysts, who unlike a lot of older analysts both have their field of expertise and understand Chinese. They will figure more prominently as Chinese security and defense analysis have become ever more important to the US.

I remember I listened to a think-tank discussion session on security matters concerning about China about two years (I forget which think tank, Council on Foreign Relations or Carnegie Endowment or something else). One of the discussion topics was about China's transparency in defense or military area. One of the American China analyst at the session, who obviously understand and speak Chinese, said that China was actually very open and transparent in these matters, at least "more transparent than democratic India or Japan." He said further that you could get 80% of the information from publicly available sources. And "China's best protection is the Chinese language."

I don't know if 80% is the right number, but personally I have to agree that you can get surprisingly (to me anyway) a lot of information that I would ordinarily believe belong to classified information. Certainly long time members of CDF can attest to this observation. For example, you can get China's military standard of generalized VLS. You can get the sizes of the cross-section of the Y-20 fuselage from public academic publications.

All of these, if you read Chinese.

Originally Posted by usaf0314

im impressed with his chinese pronunciations... not perfect, but impressive none the less

Originally Posted by weig2000

Andrew Erickson is one of US's best China analysts, due in no small part to his excellent command of Chinese. He represents a new generation of China analysts, who unlike a lot of older analysts both have their field of expertise and understand Chinese. They will figure more prominently as Chinese security and defense analysis have become ever more important to the US.

I remember I listened to a think-tank discussion session on security matters concerning about China about two years (I forget which think tank, Council on Foreign Relations or Carnegie Endowment or something else). One of the discussion topics was about China's transparency in defense or military area. One of the American China analyst at the session, who obviously understand and speak Chinese, said that China was actually very open and transparent in these matters, at least "more transparent than democratic India or Japan." He said further that you could get 80% of the information from publicly available sources. And "China's best protection is the Chinese language."

I don't know if 80% is the right number, but personally I have to agree that you can get surprisingly (to me anyway) a lot of information that I would ordinarily believe belong to classified information. Certainly long time members of CDF can attest to this observation. For example, you can get China's military standard of generalized VLS. You can get the sizes of the cross-section of the Y-20 fuselage from public academic publications.

All of these, if you read Chinese.

I don't agree. The capabilites of those weapon is hardly mention. For example, what is the true range of HQ-9/HQ-16? Specificatiion of J-10B/ J-20 AESA radar? KJ-200 and KJ-2000 radar spec?

Type 093 Submarine spec?

Development of domestic engine? Until now nobody know much about WS-10A progress or further upgrade. WS-13 and WS-15 engine development are hardly mention.

Even the manufacturer website like AVIC did not mention much of their military hardware development and progress...

Its totally different from Western style who openly state their capabilities and spec are widely available.

I think I need to point out that we're not talking about a straight apple-to-apple comparison with West's publications on weaponry specifications. China does not usually publish those information directly and you would have to piece together many indirect sources to get the picture, roughly. And even you guess it right, China would not confirm your findings.

Submarine? Engines? Those parts belong to the 20%.

I'm not sure which parts of the analyst's assertion that you disagree with. He did not compare that directly with the US or UK. He mentioned about India and Japan. And his main points is about the usual western assertion that China is not transparent is not rooted in facts. So make sure what yardstick you apply here.

His larger point stands, and I happen to agree with the analyst.

Originally Posted by Lion

I don't agree. The capabilites of those weapon is hardly mention. For example, what is the true range of HQ-9/HQ-16? Specificatiion of J-10B/ J-20 AESA radar? KJ-200 and KJ-2000 radar spec?

Type 093 Submarine spec?

Development of domestic engine? Until now nobody know much about WS-10A progress or further upgrade. WS-13 and WS-15 engine development are hardly mention.

Even the manufacturer website like AVIC did not mention much of their military hardware development and progress...

Its totally different from Western style who openly state their capabilities and spec are widely available.

Nov. 3, 2012, First Flight of Shengfei J-15S (J-15 Twin Seater Trainer)