J-15 carrier-borne fighter thread

plawolf

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

tphuang, i dont agree with you when you say that chinas first carrier will be catobar. They are very cautious on mil tech development. It is already hard to jump from 0 carriers built to a varyag sized carrier of 60000t (minimum size to operate j-15), let alone with a catapult that they dont have installed with varyag, and that is very complex tech and requires big R&D to develop (a tech that in decades of existency, only the USA has developed so far). I dont think that they will jump right away at that.

I think that they will build two STOBAR carriers, and then, when they are confortable building carriers, will go to CATOBAR.

timetable? who knows. many years certainly.

That's just nonsense.

For a start, the modern aircraft carrier steam catapult was a British invention that was first trialed on the HMS Perseus in 1950.

It is hardly an engineering mystery as to how they work, nor is the material sciences needed to construct them anywhere close to that needed to make, say single crystal jet turbine blades.

The same technology is used on roller-coasters for crying out loud. :rolleyes:

It is laughable to suggest building a steam catapult would pose any sort of serious challenge for China.

The PLA is relatively conservative, as are all militaries. That is why they will probably stick with conventional power instead of nuclear for their first indigenously built carriers, and will likely use steam catapults instead of EMCATs.

The PLAN sees the USN as the blue print for building their future carrier battle groups and will no doubt emulate how the USN uses their carriers. To do that, they need their carrier fighters to be able to undertake the bulk of the strike missions instead of replying on their surface ships like the USSR planned, as such, they need true flat tops with catapults instead of ski jumps, and that is what they are going to do.

In fact, it would not surprise me if after their first indigenous carriers become operational, the PLAN sends the Varyag back into dry dock for a major re-fit (and bare in mind we are likely talking about 2020-2025 time frame here) and levels the ski jump and put in some catapults.

Hell, it is entirely possible the Varyag might actually become the first PLAN carrier to have EMCATs fitted, as the technology should have matured enough to warrant sea trials by then, and it would be a lot less risky than building a new carrier with EMCATs to first test it out on an old carrier. If it all goes horribly wrong, it would not be a terrible loss, as the Varyag would be getting a bit long in the tooth by then anyways, so even in the worst possible outcome that she becomes useless as a carrier if the EMCATs utterly fail, being retired early would not be a too much of a waste.
 

RedMercury

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

Or perhaps a Varyag with a ski-jump and broken EMCAT is just a Varyag with a ski-jump.
 

Geographer

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

Why are catapults considered so hard to built?
 

Jeff Head

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

Why are catapults considered so hard to built?
Because despite the fact that the technology has been around and deployed for over 60 years, it is still a very difficult technical task to achieve. Hurtling that many tons of sophisticated aircraft at just the right speed, and attaining it to quickly. The pressures necessary are phenominal. The mechanisms are intricate, and their maintenance, so that they can repeat the process literally thousands of times each year for 30-50 years are equally daunting.

Some people talk like it should be easy to do...it is not.

How many countries have actually built, deployed and maintained catapults for aircraft carriers? Notice I do not say just "use" them...but build, deply and maintain.

It's a very small number.

...and they gaurd what they have learned jeaolously precisely because it was perfected at great cost in life and treasure and because it gives such a huge tactical advantage. Such advantages can litrally mean life and death to the sailors on those vessels and their escorts...thousands and thousands of them...and victory or defeat to the side ontaining such an advantage.

The Russians were very good at military matters...but they were unable to develop one and get it operational.
 

Hendrik_2000

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

Because despite the fact that the technology has been around and deployed for over 60 years, it is still a very difficult technical task to achieve. Hurtling that many tons of sophisticated aircraft at just the right speed, and attaining it to quickly. The pressures necessary are phenominal. The mechanisms are intricate, and their maintenance, so that they can repeat the process literally thousands of times each year for 30-50 years are equally daunting.

Some people talk like it should be easy to do...it is not.

How many countries have actually built, deployed and maintained catapults for aircraft carriers? Notice I do not say just "use" them...but build, deply and maintain.

It's a very small number.

...and they gaurd what they have learned jeaolously precisely because it was perfected at great cost in life and treasure and because it gives such a huge tactical advantage. Such advantages can litrally mean life and death to the sailors on those vessels and their escorts...thousands and thousands of them...and victory or defeat to the side ontaining such an advantage.

The Russians were very good at military matters...but they were unable to develop one and get it operational.

That is assuming that China has to start from scratch. They don't have to becaue they have a model to go by and the technology doesn't change that much over the years .
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In 1984 china purchased HMAS Melbourne complete with the catapult I bet they take the catapult apart and studied it to death. Then they must built prototype updated it with new electronic and improve it or enlarge it. Experiment it over number of years Voila you got yourself pretty good catapult
If you trace the development of catapult it started as technology for locomotive drive .China has well developed steam locomotive technology dating back to the 1920 when the Japanese start buidling locomotive in Harbin So there are plenty of people with knowledge of steam technology

China has good track record of reverse engineering almost everything from SU 33 to Android phone and improve on it
Read this article how they reverse engineer MK 48 Torpedo very interesting
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)

The carrier was initially sold for breaking up as scrap metal for A$1.7 million, although the sale fell through in June 1984.[3](III) She was sold again in February 1985 to the China United Shipbuilding Company for A$1.4 million, with the intention that she be towed to China and broken up for scrap.[144] The carrier departed Sydney on 27 April 1985, heading for Guangzhou, China, under the tow of tug De Ping.[156] The journey was delayed when the towing line began to part, requiring the carrier and tug to shelter in Moreton Bay, Queensland, on 30 April.[156] The towing gear broke a day later, requiring a second tug to secure the carrier while repairs were made to De Ping.[157] Three days later, Melbourne ran aground while still in Moreton Bay.[158] Melbourne finally arrived in China on 13 June.[156] The Australian government received a telex on this day, reading:(IV)

Please be advised that HMAS Melbourne arrived at Port Huangpu, intact and safely afloat, proud and majestic. She has been innocent, never once bowed to the natural or human force, in spite of the heavy storm and the talked about jinx.
—Telex communication to the Australian Government, [156]
The ship was not scrapped immediately; instead she was studied by Chinese naval architects and engineers as part of the nation's top-secret carrier development program.[6] Reports circulated that Melbourne's flight deck was either removed from the carrier or reproduced, and used for the equally secret training of People's Liberation Army Navy pilots in carrier flight operations.[6] The carrier was not dismantled for many years; according to some rumours she was not completely broken up until 2002
 
Last edited:

plawolf

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

Because despite the fact that the technology has been around and deployed for over 60 years, it is still a very difficult technical task to achieve. Hurtling that many tons of sophisticated aircraft at just the right speed, and attaining it to quickly. The pressures necessary are phenominal. The mechanisms are intricate, and their maintenance, so that they can repeat the process literally thousands of times each year for 30-50 years are equally daunting.

Some people talk like it should be easy to do...it is not.

How many countries have actually built, deployed and maintained catapults for aircraft carriers? Notice I do not say just "use" them...but build, deply and maintain.

It's a very small number.

...and they gaurd what they have learned jeaolously precisely because it was perfected at great cost in life and treasure and because it gives such a huge tactical advantage. Such advantages can litrally mean life and death to the sailors on those vessels and their escorts...thousands and thousands of them...and victory or defeat to the side ontaining such an advantage.

The Russians were very good at military matters...but they were unable to develop one and get it operational.

Well that is hardly a convincing argument.

Have you ever considered that the reason more countries did not build steam catapults might not be because it is beyond them, but rather because those catapults are only useful for carriers, and only a tiny number of navies operate carriers. Far fewer operates ones big enough for catapults to be effective on, especially since the introduction of the sea harrier. Thus having a catapult but no carrier is a rather pointless exercise.

Of course steam catapults are complex and the materials sciences involved is advanced, but I was not suggesting we build one in our garden shed.

Steam catapults, like any technology, is a perishable skill, and if you do not make any for a while, you need to do a lot of work and invest a lot of money to develop and build one. For the likes of the British and French, who would only be building a couple of carriers max, it is simply more economical to buy them off the shelf from the Americans.

Or are you suggesting the British (who invented the thing) and the French do not have the technological or engineering capabilities to develop and manufacture suitable steam catapults if they really wanted to?

Using the Russians as an example is also unconvincing unless you also look at how much time, effort and resources they have put into developing steam catapults. My history in this is a little hazy, but from what I remember, the Soviet navy only came round to carriers very late in the day, and have spent relatively little time and resources developing surface ships and focused instead mainly on their sub fleets.

They didn't develop a catapult, but was that because they couldn't at all, or because they didn't put enough resources and time into the effort?

Apple is amazing at electronics, but if they made a half hearted attempt to develop a AESA radar in a couple of years, do you think there is a good chance the radar would be much good?
 

plawolf

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

Or perhaps a Varyag with a ski-jump and broken EMCAT is just a Varyag with a ski-jump.

I was thinking along the lines of removing the ski jump altogether and putting cats on all the launch positions. If the PLAN was really adventurous, they probably could have put a steam cat on the angled deck before the Varyag was launched. But either the catapult isn't ready yet or they decided it was one too many thing to be worried about for their first carrier.
 

centrinoe

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

There is rumor saying that to keep up with Varyag refitting program. The specifications of J-15 are compromised. It might not be as capable as Super hornets or Rafale. In the end, it is the first ship-borne fighter China tried to built. However, having this jet is still a giant leap for PLAN, since the fleet air defense capability will be greatly enhanced. Possibly, the naval strike range will be extended as well.

I think the next two PLAN carriers will still be STROBAR. By the time these three STOBAR carriers are operational, PLAN might move on to CATOBAR carrier if China has its own EMAL catapult, nuclear propulsion for carrier, and next ship-borne jet. They will be more experienced with carrier operation as well. 10 years ago, PLAN fleet is mostly consist of mostly obsolete 051 destroyers. Now they have 052C destroyers and 054A frigates as the backbone of surface fleet, and a carrier is coming on the way. It's not bad progress.

It would be interesting to compare J-15 with Mig-29K. They each developed from the Flanker and the Fulcrum, with updated avionics and weapon system. And they are both operated on STOBAR carriers. Carrier could carry more mig-29Ks since it is smaller in size, but J-15/Su-33 will have longer range.
 
Last edited:

Spartan95

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

tphuang, i dont agree with you when you say that chinas first carrier will be catobar. They are very cautious on mil tech development. It is already hard to jump from 0 carriers built to a varyag sized carrier of 60000t (minimum size to operate j-15), let alone with a catapult that they dont have installed with varyag, and that is very complex tech and requires big R&D to develop (a tech that in decades of existency, only the USA has developed so far). I dont think that they will jump right away at that.

I used to have that opinion as well. Now, I think that PLAN's 1st indigenous carrier (i.e., that 1 after Varyag) will be CATOBAR.

The reason for the change in opinion is because it is becoming increasingly clear that the PLA wants to have world-class hardware. They want to be cutting edge, not trailing edge. Some prominent examples as follows:

1. 1st Asian nation with indigenous phased array radar equipped destroyer (052C).

2. 1st conventional carrier with phased array radar (Varyag).

3. 1st Asian nation with indigenous 5th gen fighter (J-20).

Hence, I consider it entirely possible that PLAN will be the 1st Asian navy with an operational EMCAT (possibly 1st navy in the world as they may beat the USN to it).

What other cutting edge innovations they will introduce remains to be seen.
 

plawolf

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

I don't buy this compromised specs story, especially since SAC developed the J15 from the J11B and have a Su33 prototype to study. And its not like the Varyag's re-fit has been what you could call 'brisk'.

The J15 might be slightly less capable than the J11B in some aspects, but that is going to be more as a result of the engineering necessity of turning it into a carrier borne fighter.

Besides, even if they had to make compromises for the first batch, there is nothing stopping them from developing the J15 further after delivering the first dozen planes or so.

China is not going to be getting any more carriers for 4 or 5 years at least, and a dozen J15 blk1s would be more than enough to train up crews and pilots as well as handle any operational needs the Varyag might be called to perform. Hell, the Varyag itself will in all likelihood not be ready for operational deployments for some years to come.

If there is any sort of deadline issue, SAC could easily bash out a few pre-production examples for the PLAN to test and train with, while they develop the J15 to what it was originally planned to be. Then they would easily pump out enough to fully stock the Varyag by the time it is ready for operational deployments.

Carrier pilots can train mainly on J11Bs, and use the J15 pre-production examples for specific carrier operational training.

There is absolutely no reason why the J15 have to be 'locked' in its current configuration if there are improvements still needing to be made.

But I do not think the J15 will really ever be able to match the Rafale no matter how much they upgraded it. The J15 is limited by the Flanker airframe, and will always have a larger RCS compared to the Rafale, and may well be less agile if we assume the Rafale is roughly inline with the J10 in terms of agility, and we all know who wins between a J10 and J11.
 
Top