What's new

China sends its second aircraft carrier (the first domestically-made one) to the South China Sea

Deino

INT'L MOD
Nov 9, 2014
9,156
14
14,252
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
You must be a genius German, @Viet. You understand everything, from politics, macro-economy policies, manufacturing to armed force (from small arms to aircraft carrier). Only in Germany can you be educated like that. In Vietnam, we do not have genius like you.

Hey ... please no country bashing. I'm from Germany and I won't say I'm educated to "understand everything, from politics, macro-economy policies, manufacturing to armed force" ... so please be fair.
 

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 18, 2012
22,606
0
17,069
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
Of course the Japanese F-35Bs are not in service yet and JS Izumo and JS Kaga have not yet been modified. While plans are to acquire 42 F-35Bs, they will be procured little by little. The defense budget request for next fiscal year includes the associated cost for 6 F-35Bs. So I'd imagine it take about a year for delivery, at which point, the modification on JS Izumo probably will be finished. The mid-term defence plan which goes to year 2023 has a plan for procuring 18 of the 42 planned F-35Bs. In other words, number are few.

J-15 numbers are also quite few. It is het to be seen if another batch of J-15s are to be made. For carrier 003, some catapult capable J-15s would be needed I would assume. But for the time being, around 22 J-15s.

In an attrition style battle, the F-35Bs, even with fewer numbers should maintain superiority. But if a third batch of J-15s are made by the time Japan has only 18 F-35Bs (about 2024), then J-15s might have enough numbers to deter F-35Bs in some scenerios. A Chinese stealth successor to the J-15 seems at least a decade away. Naturally the location of a speculated engagment is going to have a big impact. In the Taiwan Strait or Paracel Island group, Japanese F-35Bs may be at the disadvatage. But in the Philippine Sea, Indian Ocean, or southern half of the South China Sea, J-15s would be at a disadvantage.
Japan should have at least 5 carriers. Ideally 10. Vietnam navy at least 12 submarines and some dozen of frigates and destroyers. I am willing to bet the Pla will use China’s industrial might to make warships like chinese sausages.
 

obj 705A

FULL MEMBER
May 26, 2019
700
0
1,382
Country
Iraq
Location
Iraq
I don't know why people are comparing Japan to China, comparing Japan to China makes about as much sense as comparing India to China, countries like Japan, South Korea, Britain, India, Russia etc.. can only hope to have 1 or at best 3 CVs & that's it, economicaly they are incapable of mass producing carriers, China & the US are the only countries capable of mass producing aircraft carriers.
 

eldarlmari

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 24, 2012
5,652
-21
9,367
Country
Singapore
Location
Singapore
I don't know why people are comparing Japan to China, comparing Japan to China makes about as much sense as comparing India to China, countries like Japan, South Korea, Britain, India, Russia etc.. can only hope to have 1 or at best 3 CVs & that's it, economicaly they are incapable of mass producing carriers, China & the US are the only countries capable of mass producing aircraft carriers.
Those countries that u have listed can only afford to have 2 ACs at best- that is if they even atually need them.

I don't c how south Korea n India ever need any.

India's blessed geography gives her plenty of natural ACS which is in line with her policy of securing the Indian ocean, while south Korea has no vast overseas interest.

Russia' AC got screwed again recently n she's officially having zero active, patrolling AC. This is why ACS r always made in at least sister pairs. 1 is patrolling while the other is undergoing maintenance.
 

riscol

FULL MEMBER
May 23, 2019
1,087
-16
2,008
Country
Germany
Location
Switzerland
dog food brings intelligence to another kind of level of understanding how many carriers, warships and submarines other countries need.
 

God Parshuram

BANNED
Mar 28, 2019
703
-6
310
Country
India
Location
India
Many of dreams as such been shattered in past and bravado being proven wrong. Let the man speak of words while on other hand, the battleground will prove otherwise. Don't feel provoked on something of a theory as such whereby comments are made without due consideration of forces & elements as well as tactics into play.

Regards,
Hey Eagle don't write off the things out right.
If I give reference in favor of post from none other than Chinese media than are you ready reconsider what you have written ?

His own navy is a joke compared to PLAN, the poor thing needs to bring in the USN.
But Chinese think tanks don't think so.
 

The Eagle

SENIOR MODERATOR
Oct 15, 2015
19,106
154
34,373
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Hey Eagle don't write off the things out right.
If I give reference in favor of post from none other than Chinese media than are you ready reconsider what you have written ?



But Chinese think tanks don't think so.
Just read the post I quoted and revisit your word of "write off" & "outright" while comprehending my post.
 

God Parshuram

BANNED
Mar 28, 2019
703
-6
310
Country
India
Location
India
@waz @Deino @The Eagle @WebMaster

Trolling post that mean to provoke. Hope any action be taken against such. Will amend quote
once moderated.

My post doesn't become trolling just because you are finding it difficult to digest this is not what I am saying just to troll. It is said by Chinese media Here is what they have to say.


Chinese Media Takes Aim at J-15 Fighter


In an unusual departure for mainland Chinese-language media, the Beijing-based Sina Military Network (SMN) criticized the capabilities of the carrier-borne J-15 Flying Shark as nothing more than a “flopping fish.”
On Sept. 22, the state-controlled China Daily Times reported the new aircraft carrier Liaoning had just finished a three-month voyage and conducted over 100 sorties of “various aircraft,” of which the J-15 “took off and landed on the carrier with maximum load and various weapons.” This report was also carried on the official Liberation Army Daily.
Contradicting any report by official military or government media is unusual in China given state control of the media.
What sounded more like a rant than analysis, SMN, on Sept. 23, reported the new J-15 was incapable of flying from the Liaoning with heavy weapons, “effectively crippling its attack range and firepower.”
The fighter can take off and land on the carrier with two YJ-83K anti-ship missiles, two PL-8 air-to-air missiles, and four 500-kilogram bombs. But a weapons “load exceeding 12 tons will not get it off the carrier’s ski jump ramp.” This might prohibit it from carrying heavier munitions such as PL-12 medium-range air-to-air missiles.
To further complicate things, the J-15 can carry only two tons of weapons while fully fueled. “This would equip it with no more than two YJ-83K and two PL-8 missiles,” thus the “range of the YJ-83K prepared for the fighter will be shorter than comparable YJ-83K missiles launched from larger PLAN [People’s Liberation Army Navy] vessels. The J-15 will be boxed into less than 120 [kilometers] of attack range.”
Losing the ability to carry the PL-12 medium-range air-to-air missiles will make the J-15 an “unlikely match” against other foreign carrier-based fighters.
“Even the Vietnam People’s Air Force can outmatch the PL-8 short-range missile. Without space for an electronic countermeasure pod, a huge number of J-15s must be mobilized for even simple missions, a waste for the PLA Navy in using the precious space aboard its sole aircraft carrier in service.”
Built by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, the J-15 is a copy of the Russian-made Su-33. China acquired an Su-33 prototype from the Ukraine in 2001. Avionics are most likely the same as the J-11B (Su-27). In 2006, Russia accused China of reverse engineering the Su-27 and canceled a production license to build 200 Su-27s after only 95 aircraft had been built.
Vasily Kashin, a China military specialist at the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, suggests the J-15 might be a better aircraft than the Su-33. “I think that there might be some improvements because electronic equipment now weighs less than in the 1990s,” he said. It could also be lighter due to new composites that China is using on the J-11B that were not available on the original Su-33.
Despite improvements, Kashin wonders why the Chinese bothered with the Su-33 given the fact that Russia gave up on it. Weight problems and other issues forced the Russians to develop the MiG-29K, which has better power-to-weight ratio and can carry more weapons. “Of course, when the Chinese get their future carriers equipped with catapults, that limitation will not apply and they will be able to fully realize Su-33/J-15 potential — huge range and good payload,” Kashin said.
The Liaoning is the problem. The carrier is small — 53,000 tons — and uses a ski jump. From Russia’s experience, “taking off from the carrier with takeoff weight exceeding some 26 tons is very difficult,” Kashin said.
A possible answer is that it was unable to take off with both. “The article says that it can only carry ‘two tons’ of missiles and munitions when fully fueled, which is 4,400 pounds, and two YJ-83s plus two PL-8s would weigh over 4,000 pounds, leaving no margin for any PL-12s. But I don’t see why it couldn’t take off with PL-12s if it wasn’t carrying YJ-83s.” Cliff concludes that the J-15 should be capable of carrying PL-12s when it is flying purely air-to-air missions and that “it probably just can’t carry PL-12s when it is flying a strike mission.”
Kashin said the J-15, unlike the Su-33, should have a “potent” internal countermeasures suite, thus allowing for more space for weapons. The SMN report suggests it has an external electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod.
Weight issues should also not be too much of a problem for the J-15, he said, since the Su-33 did fly from the same type of carrier carrying “6-8 air-to-air missiles and Sorbtsia ECM pods carrying something like 6 to 6.5 tons of fuel.”
China’s next carriers will reportedly use electromagnetic catapults, Kashin said, but “limitations are significant when it comes to air-to-surface weapons, which limit the J-15’s use as a multirole fighter.

http://miragec14.blogspot.com/2013/09/chinese-media-takes-aim-at-j-15-fighter.html?m=1
 

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 18, 2012
22,606
0
17,069
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
Those countries that u have listed can only afford to have 2 ACs at best- that is if they even atually need them.

I don't c how south Korea n India ever need any.

India's blessed geography gives her plenty of natural ACS which is in line with her policy of securing the Indian ocean, while south Korea has no vast overseas interest.

Russia' AC got screwed again recently n she's officially having zero active, patrolling AC. This is why ACS r always made in at least sister pairs. 1 is patrolling while the other is undergoing maintenance.
Nonsense!
Japan can build 5 or 10 Izumo class carriers in no time. A bit more money - let’s say - double the budget is helpful. Shinzo Abe can ask the BoJ to print money.
Here a Viet Navy captain onboard of the Izumo, at the carrier‘s steering wheel at the recent exercise.


 

eldarlmari

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 24, 2012
5,652
-21
9,367
Country
Singapore
Location
Singapore
Nonsense!
Japan can build 5 or 10 Izumo class carriers in no time. A bit more money - let’s say - double the budget is helpful. Shinzo Abe can ask the BoJ to print money.
Here a Viet Navy captain onboard of the Izumo, at the carrier‘s steering wheel at the recent exercise.


U check carefully whether that's a Heli carrier or aircraft carrier
 

IblinI

SENIOR MEMBER
Jun 21, 2016
2,663
1
5,154
Country
China
Location
New Zealand
Pls keep your friendship to yourself!
By the way, why is the carrier not escorted by warships? Where are the cruisers? destroyers?
Our fishermen come close I would guess within 100 meters.
I would like to read your interpretation on this, why is the AC seems alone in this video clip?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top