CV-18 Fujian/003 CATOBAR carrier thread

P

Phantom Chuck

New Member
Registered Member
The size of the F-14 were necessitated in part by the state of electronics technology in the 1960s and early 1970s, which made both long range air interception radar and long range air to air missiles fairly heavy and bulky. If you want to have the ability to intercept inbound cruise missile carrying bombers before they can launch, you have to accept carrying a smaller number of larger and heavier fighters Like the F-14.

With contemporary electronic technology it is possible to make both long range radar and long range missiles much more compact. it is no longer clear that having a smaller number of F-14/J-15 sized fighters is still a necessary trade off. The better trade off might be having a larger number of medium sized fighters that can replicate the same long range interception capability as what only the F-14 could once offer.
 
G

GiantPanda

Junior Member
Registered Member
Phantom Chuck said:
The size of the F-14 were necessitated in part by the state of electronics technology in the 1960s and early 1970s, which made both long range air interception radar and long range air to air missiles fairly heavy and bulky. If you want to have the ability to intercept inbound cruise missile carrying bombers before they can launch, you have to accept carrying a smaller number of larger and heavier fighters Like the F-14.

With contemporary electronic technology it is possible to make both long range radar and long range missiles much more compact. it is no longer clear that having a smaller number of F-14/J-15 sized fighters is still a necessary trade off. The better trade off might be having a larger number of medium sized fighters that can replicate the same long range interception capability as what only the F-14 could once offer.
Click to expand...

F-14 was a long-range interceptor. It was complimented by A-6, A-7 and later F/A-18 in the attack role.

J-15 is a multirole fighter. There is no other fix-wing that operates with it today. Having a larger platform most likely gives flexibility to more roles. That said, the future J-35 is smaller and will take over the CAP and possibly the interceptor role -- though that depends on range and size too. It might make sense to send a J-15 with PL-17 which a J-35 might not be able to carry.

Size impacts capability for both aircraft and the ship that carries it. There is a reason China went after the SU-33 and then finding it unavailable took the long process of creating its own derivative instead of buying the MiG-29K that Russia was offering.

Perhaps if China had started with a 40K ton Kiev conversion instead of a Kutnetzov class then maybe the PLAN would have gone after smaller aircraft. But it is obvious that they saw the J-15 as being the right size for its carriers which start at 67K tons and up.
 
Last edited:
00CuriousObserver

00CuriousObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yankee is speculating that the 003 will be commissioned before Sept 3rd, based on the reasoning that it would be odd for the aircraft (intended for carrier use) to appear on their own first without the carrier. However, he admits that it is entirely possible this might not happen.

Also (and this is not from Guancha), with events like these, it's important to consider certain "key people" who will certainly be at the ceremony. Coordinating with their schedule is not necessarily easy.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
lcloo said:
I see mobile crane and fuel truck next to the island structure. IMO, this must be quite old image.

I expect the jet fuel storage tank, pumps and piping etc should be installed and verified by now, thus the need of a fuel truck is not rquired.
Click to expand...

First, I agree that this could be an old image, and I do not see anything which is decisively indicative of a "viewing stand".

That said, the presence of a fuel truck and mobile crane does not necessarily indicate anything.
A carrier could be in late stages of sea trials, or even be in active service, and could still necessitate having them onboard for a brief period (they are easily removed from the carrier as well obviously), so I wouldn't use that as an indicator of how recent this image is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top