What's new

Shenyang J-15 aircraft carrier-based aircraft

ex-USSR doctrine is useless, the USSR is not a naval power. Besides, we bought the ship as a casino, maybe they gave us a lesson in serving vodka to customers, but not in carrier operations.

Carrier operation is different and yet the same, the US doctrine isn't suited for China, mostly because we don't have quit as many carrier nor are our missions the same. The different launch methods and equipments on a carrier will change things, but it's not as big a leap as no carrier to carrier.

LAstly, it's not like without the liaoning we would have had a catapult carrier now, it's more like it would be commissioned around 2020 regardless, and to fill in the gap we got this floating casino of a carrier out at sea.

It's also a chance to train the pilots, though I will admit I don't know what the pilot needs to know and how different it is for launching and landing between the different carriers.

IT IS REALLY STUPID TO SAY USSR IS NOT OF NAVAL POWER

USSR Navy was at lease at the same level with US Navy during 60s, 70s and early 80s. In some case, some expert will also consider USSR's navy is somewhat stronger than the US Navy. Maybe you are thinking of Russian Navy instead, i don't know .

As @IND151 said, USSR is the master of STOBAR carrier operation. Their doctorine were widely used in multiple area in this world, they also partly influence the way the Big gun runs their own navy, Royal Navy is a prime example.

And again you fail to see my point, my point is not being aircraft/pilot training, but carrier operation. You can put a navy pilot to train with an airforce pilot, you can even put J-15S inline with the airforce too. However, does that mean you can put that naval aviator into a ship and expect he knows everything or anything??

Problem with this is, PLA have plenty of PILOT training, it's the NAVAL AVIATION training they are lacking and that should be what they are going to. If you still fail to see my point then don't bother......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
IT IS REALLY STUPID TO SAY USSR IS NOT OF NAVAL POWER

USSR Navy was at lease at the same level with US Navy during 60s, 70s and early 80s. In some case, some expert will also consider USSR's navy is somewhat stronger than the US Navy. Maybe you are thinking of Russian Navy instead, i don't know .

As @IND151 said, USSR is the master of STOBAR carrier operation. Their doctorine were widely used in multiple area in this world, they also partly influence the way the Big gun runs their own navy, Royal Navy is a prime example.

And again you fail to see my point, my point is not being aircraft/pilot training, but carrier operation. You can put a navy pilot to train with an airforce pilot, you can even put J-15S inline with the airforce too. However, does that mean you can put that naval aviator into a ship and expect he knows everything or anything??

Problem with this is, PLA have plenty of PILOT training, it's the NAVAL AVIATION training they are lacking and that should be what they are going to. If you still fail to see my point then don't bother......

I wont call USSR master of STOBAR carrier operation. They never used the AC the way US does. The centerpiece of USSR naval strategy was their SSNs and boomers. Their ACs is the escort.
PLAN is following the US path.
Many of PLANs ship captains are naval aviators.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Let me answer your question with a question.

Brazil ALREADY had a catapult carrier now, does that mean they have bigger World stage influence than India and China combine??

As i said, and you quoted, you can do whatever the hell you like with your money, you can get a catapult carrier now, or you can get 12, China have the means and money to build it, just what are you doing to do with the one or 12 Catapult carrier with? Beside running up and down the chinese coast before 2030??

There are PROPER ways to train up to what you want, there are STUPID way to train up to what you want, my point being, China should wait until the first catapult carrier to induce J-15 with it, not to running it half-arsed with a ski-jump carrier. What are you going to expect from learning with plane running half of whatever it should be??

As i said, you fork the bill, you can do whatever the heck you want, even if that means you are wasting your own money, hey, that's fine by me

Question, if they don't opt for catapult carriers, would they be better off with just developing another carrier based aircraft and dropping the J-15 project? Or should they work on perfecting the J-15 and trying to get it to work on the carrier they do have?
 
.
Methinks J-15 should be used primarily as a fleet defense fighter and not as an anti ship plane. For its role as a fleet defense fighter, it can carry plenty of PL-12 for the job. Anti ship job should be given to Type 052D and Type 095 and Type 041.
 
.
So everyone reply here agree Taiwan belongs to China:coffee:
 
.
I wont call USSR master of STOBAR carrier operation. They never used the AC the way US does. The centerpiece of USSR naval strategy was their SSNs and boomers. Their ACs is the escort.
PLAN is following the US path.
Many of PLANs ship captains are naval aviators.

The bolted is your problem...

Maybe because you fail to see CATOBAR and STOBAR are two different application.

The US have never master the STOBAR ops but they are getting quite good for CATOBAR opeartion.

USSR uses their carrier as a major part of sub hunting, instead of using them CAS/CAP role like if they were to be used by a CATOBAR carrier with hugh payload and hugh planeload.

If you even care to look at the ex-USSR complement of any of their carrier, you will find they very much depend on Ka-28 and Ka-50 to do the work, both if which were anti-sub platform.

However, US uses their STOBAR (LHDS) again differently, when they were tasked and commanded by the Navy, but it was the Maine who are actually using it, they use it as actual LHDs only difference is they do operation stand alone and do not require outside force (Fleet carrier) to support with their operation, hence freezing them to do CAP/CAS for other asset.

By saying USSR does not use their carrier like the US do, you kill the whole reason of why USSR using STOBAR carrier, which is by no mean using them same as a fleet carrier. The PATH you mentioned is simply different.

So in the end you are wrong.....

And i don't know why you said most PLANs ship captain are (were, they were but now commanding ship) naval aviator.

And they are not the same as what US called "Naval Aviator" anyway as China only have naval air fleet arms - fix wing after they acquire liaoning in 2012, unless you are saying those Captain were serving with another navy that with an aircraft carrier in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, their experience of naval aviator should not be counted nor relevant.
 
.
25_234996_57b01580e2c8759.jpg

25_234996_225239adb3d3a43.jpg

25_234996_c03c9f0ecc2fb13.jpg
 
.
You know what is entertaining? An imbecile from a country unable to produce its own fighters bragging about how inferior J-15 is. It's like a failing class retard laughing at someone for only scoring 80% on a test. I am totally frustrated by your stupidity.

P.S. Have you replaced the flying coffins with second generation flying coff....I mean LCA yet?


If India is not able to produce aircraft, then It makes J-15 superior???? High IQ logic!!!!!!!
 
. . . . . . . .
Back
Top Bottom