CHINA’S NEW CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE WILL EXCEED THE "SUPER HORNET"

[SomeGuy]

Proven plane with advance features F-18 Super Hornet is considered to be a 4.5 Generation plane and you are trying to compare a plane which is still in developmental phase.First complete the plane and then try to compare
Your comparison is like comparing J20 with F22 which can never be compared

J-15 had it's first flight nearly a year and a half ago.

Most of it's systems have already been developed and tested - on the J-11B.

 

[faithfulguy]

cos we don't start illegal wars and killing people all year around

There is not such thing as a legal or illegal war. Well, if you lose, you start a illegal war. If you win ,then the war is legal.

 

[Mani2020]

There is not such thing as a legal or illegal war. Well, if you lose, you start a illegal war. If you win ,then the war is legal.

I think he is talking about something else ,if you can focus bit more you will understand what he is talking about ,as pointing directly to what he means will lead to a troll war

 

[webber]

There is not such thing as a legal or illegal war. Well, if you lose, you start a illegal war. If you win ,then the war is legal.

hail hitler

 

[Time]

Bullshit. The J-15 may be good for strike, but it is never intended to, and I doubt it is able to, perform the air defense role. It may have AESA radar, TVC engine, and all that crap, but that's not going to change the fact that its airframe is too bulky and its external load is going to slow it down. I also do not see any major stealth reduction attempts. And I doubt a powerful engine like WS-10B/G or WS-15 is going to be used.

That's why China developed the carrier J-10C (developed from J-10B) to go along with this rather unimpressive fighter.

Yeah, but we're talking about the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. It has AESA radar and it specializes in maneuverability. It's also lighter than the J-15.

Bullshit, how about some basic knowledge and a little logic there before posting?

F-18E/Fs are much bigger than F-18C/Ds. F-18 C/Ds' pilots laughed at F-18E/Fs' low speed and poor acceleration. And payload will slow down any plane, not just flankers. AA missiles are not Sun-Burns!

Lighter means more maneuverable? T-10 serials planes are well-known as very maneuverable. Any plane including F-15, F-18, F-16 with a lot of payload will not be very maneuverable. Why just T-10 serials?

The small single engine J-10s serve on a carrier will let the Pentagon has no need to worry about China's carriers. J-10s' with their intakes can not be possiblly take off or land on a carrier. They do not have enough oil. Americans have already been not satisfied by F-18s' range. J-10s will never be on a carrier.

Flankers have enough oil, agility, payload and big enough radar to counter fighters like F-18s or strike any surface targets. A catapult launched J-15 with powerful engines which is not a problem as long as J-20 will enter service and technologies comparable to a Su-35 is much better than super bugs with weak engines.

And an F-18E is not a stealth fighter.

If lighter smaller planes are so good, why did the US bother to produce F-14 serials and F-15 serials, why did so many countries buy F-15 serials, why does Boeing continue on F-15E serials' evolution? Just for strike mission?

 

[cross1993]

J15? It comes from the SAC......I don't believe it is better than the "SUPER HORNET".

 

[HongWu]

J-15 is few years behind F-18E/F Super Hornet. J-15 is already in flight testing. It's basically a J-11B adapted for naval role.

It is comparable in capability to F-18E/F Super Hornet because of light composite airframe, RCS reduction, FWS10 engines, AESA radar and advanced AA missiles. Neither side has a distinct advantage over the other side.

However, China is totally lacking in carrier ops experience. It's navy pilots are obviously not as good as US navy pilots. There is a long way to go here.

 

[CardSharp]

Proven plane with advance features F-18 Super Hornet is considered to be a 4.5 Generation plane and you are trying to compare a plane which is still in developmental phase.First complete the plane and then try to compare
Your comparison is like comparing J20 with F22 which can never be compared

Whereas comparing an indigenious Indian stealth fighter with the J-20 will never happen.

 

[CardSharp]

I agree. However, it is noteworthy that no weapon manufactured in Asia has been "proven" or tested in battle for the last 30 years. It is then pointless to discuss Asian weapons if they can only be compared after being "proven."

I have no idea why the Chinese fanboys here are so quick to speculate on J-20's specs before it even flew. It's natural, I guess; it took quiet a while to convince Indians on their subforum that LCA is not 4.5th gen.

A few years longer than 30 years but the NVA flew Chinese made MiG's against the US Air force. Also PLA anti-aircraft battalions served in the air defence of Hanoi.

 

[Akasa]

Bullshit, how about some basic knowledge and a little logic there before posting?

F-18E/Fs are much bigger than F-18C/Ds. F-18 C/Ds' pilots laughed at F-18E/Fs' low speed and poor acceleration. And payload will slow down any plane, not just flankers. AA missiles are not Sun-Burns!

Lighter means more maneuverable? T-10 serials planes are well-known as very maneuverable. Any plane including F-15, F-18, F-16 with a lot of payload will not be very maneuverable. Why just T-10 serials?

The small single engine J-10s serve on a carrier will let the Pentagon has no need to worry about China's carriers. J-10s' with their intakes can not be possiblly take off or land on a carrier. They do not have enough oil. Americans have already been not satisfied by F-18s' range. J-10s will never be on a carrier.

Flankers have enough oil, agility, payload and big enough radar to counter fighters like F-18s or strike any surface targets. A catapult launched J-15 with powerful engines which is not a problem as long as J-20 will enter service and technologies comparable to a Su-35 is much better than super bugs with weak engines.

And an F-18E is not a stealth fighter.

If lighter smaller planes are so good, why did the US bother to produce F-14 serials and F-15 serials, why did so many countries buy F-15 serials, why does Boeing continue on F-15E serials' evolution? Just for strike mission?

F-18E/F's are smaller and lighter than the J-15. The F-18E/F's also happen to have more powerful engine (and thus probably higher thrust-to-weight ratio) than the J-15. This coupled with the lighter weight will definitely mean greater agility (assuming that J-15 doesn't use TVC). Yeah, payload will slow down both planes, but Super Hornet has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio.

If you really think J-15 was intended for air superiority, then you don't know much about aircraft configuration and airframes.

And how maneuverable are those T-10s, after all? Any numbers on the max G-turn? And the J-15 isn't even based on the T-10.

Sure, Flankers may be the "big boys" when it comes to fuel and maybe payload, but definitely not the nimble guys. The fact that it's big already undermines its agility. Guess why the Su-35s need TVC?

Super Hornets are not stealth aircraft, yes, but they have AESAs. If J-15 doesn't induct AESA, it's got a serious deficiency.

About the J-10C, yes, single-engine J-10B's won't have enough power to launch from carriers. That's why CAC took out the term "single" and put in "double" instead.

 

[Time]

F-18E/F's are smaller and lighter than the J-15. The F-18E/F's also happen to have more powerful engine (and thus probably higher thrust-to-weight ratio) than the J-15. This coupled with the lighter weight will definitely mean greater agility (assuming that J-15 doesn't use TVC). Yeah, payload will slow down both planes, but Super Hornet has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio.

If you really think J-15 was intended for air superiority, then you don't know much about aircraft configuration and airframes.

And how maneuverable are those T-10s, after all? Any numbers on the max G-turn? And the J-15 isn't even based on the T-10.

Sure, Flankers may be the "big boys" when it comes to fuel and maybe payload, but definitely not the nimble guys. The fact that it's big already undermines its agility. Guess why the Su-35s need TVC?

Super Hornets are not stealth aircraft, yes, but they have AESAs. If J-15 doesn't induct AESA, it's got a serious deficiency.

About the J-10C, yes, single-engine J-10B's won't have enough power to launch from carriers. That's why CAC took out the term "single" and put in "double" instead.

Can you at least do some basic investigation before posting?

according to wikipedia, if it is basically reliable.

su-33's Thrust/weight is 0.83, max g is 8. Su-27SK's tw ratio is 1.09, no data there about max G. But they are well-known as a type of 9G level jet.su-35 is a 10 G level jet.

Super hornets'Thrust/weight is 0.93, design load factor: 7.6 g

Saturn/Lyulka AL-31F turbofans
Dry thrust: 7,670 kgf (75.22 kN, 16,910 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 12,500 kgf (122.6 kN, 27,560 lbf) each

and your powerful F414-GE-400:
Dry thrust: 14,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each

When I mentioned T-10 serials planes, I meant flankers. Did I put a K after the T-10? Whether or not J-15 is based on T-10K, it is based on flankers.

No matter how many engines J-10 will have, with chin intakes, it is not a suitable fighter to operate on a carrier. If you want to change all those things, it will be a basically new plane. Seems CAC is busy on J-20s.

One important reason France withdrawed from EF-2000 program was they wanted a fighter suitable to operate on their carriers. EF-2000 has exactly the same type of chin intakes.
Did you mean Su-35 needs TVC is because of engines are not powerful enough? Any evidence? Why F-22 needs TVC?

Since it is possible to introduce new material and new engines and ASEA radars to J-15, I can not see huge disadvantages compared to super bugs.

There is a game called 7-G which is a sim about super bugs.

And TW ratio does not mean acceleration ability, flankers with good aerodynamic shape have low resistance when flying .

Super Hornet is the slowest fighter that America built in the last 30 or 40 years. it cannot even attain a speed of mach 2.

According to wiki, The United States Marine Corps has avoided the Super Hornet program and their resistance is so high that they would rather fly old Navy F/A-18Cs that have been replaced with Super Hornets.

It is good at changing speed to angle movement, but to gain speed again? That needs some time.

 

[SomeGuy]

F-18E/F's are smaller and lighter than the J-15. The F-18E/F's also happen to have more powerful engine (and thus probably higher thrust-to-weight ratio) than the J-15. This coupled with the lighter weight will definitely mean greater agility (assuming that J-15 doesn't use TVC). Yeah, payload will slow down both planes, but Super Hornet has a higher thrust-to-weight ratio.

A simple check will tell you that the first part of your statement is wrong.

97.9kN thrust for F414-GE-400
122 kN thrust for AL-31F
132 kN thrust for WS-10A.

And without knowing the actual weight of J-15, you can't really say anything about J-15 T/W ratio.
However Wiki states that Super Hornets T/W is 0.93 in the fighter configuration!

For comparison:

J-11A T/W is 1.04 (9G limit)
J-11B (on which J-15 is based) T/W is likely to be higher because of reduced weight and more powerful engines.

If you really think J-15 was intended for air superiority, then you don't know much about aircraft configuration and airframes.

And how maneuverable are those T-10s, after all? Any numbers on the max G-turn? And the J-15 isn't even based on the T-10.

Sure, Flankers may be the "big boys" when it comes to fuel and maybe payload, but definitely not the nimble guys. The fact that it's big already undermines its agility. Guess why the Su-35s need TVC?

You don't think Flankers are highly manoeuverable. Check this out:

YouTube - Su-37 extreme manuevrability demo

Super Hornets are not stealth aircraft, yes, but they have AESAs. If J-15 doesn't induct AESA, it's got a serious deficiency.

When fighter AESA is ready, I'm sure J-15 will receive upgrade.
No need to design a new plane just to have AESA.

 

[Akasa]

A simple check will tell you that the first part of your statement is wrong.

97.9kN thrust for F414-GE-400
122 kN thrust for AL-31F
132 kN thrust for WS-10A.

And without knowing the actual weight of J-15, you can't really say anything about J-15 T/W ratio.
However Wiki states that Super Hornets T/W is 0.93 in the fighter configuration!

For comparison:

J-11A T/W is 1.04 (9G limit)
J-11B (on which J-15 is based) T/W is likely to be higher because of reduced weight and more powerful engines.



You don't think Flankers are highly manoeuverable. Check this out:

YouTube - Su-37 extreme manuevrability demo



When fighter AESA is ready, I'm sure J-15 will receive upgrade.
No need to design a new plane just to have AESA.

The engine thrusts you gave were AFTERBURNING thrusts. The Al-31 dry thrust is lower than that of the F414. The J-15 was developed from J-11B, yes? Then it would weight at least 23,926 kg. With the addition of canards and carrier arresting equipment, I would expect the weight to increase. Fuel payload might also be increased since it's a naval aircraft.

The Su-37 has TVC engines and advanced fly-by-wire system. J-15, as of the prototype, doesn't have TVC. The Su-37 also has an extremely powerful engine (with afterburning thrust of 145 kN). This will ensure a high thrust-to-weight ratio, which allows such maneuverability to be achieved.

Honestly, I think the J-15 was a waste of time and money on SAC's part. If I were the commander in chief of the PLAAF, I would have invested in CAC more and their J-10C.

 

[Dragon Emperor]

I hope that by 2020 China develops a carrier version of J-20, to deploy on Chinese homemade built nuclear aircraft carrier similar to USN Nimitz class(China does not need more than 10 like USN, just 4-5CVBGs are enough). Chinese carriers can alos be used for humanitarian missions and prestige, so for China as a Big Power needs carriers just like humans need air to breathe.

 

[faithfulguy]

J-15 is few years behind F-18E/F Super Hornet. J-15 is already in flight testing. It's basically a J-11B adapted for naval role.

It is comparable in capability to F-18E/F Super Hornet because of light composite airframe, RCS reduction, FWS10 engines, AESA radar and advanced AA missiles. Neither side has a distinct advantage over the other side.

However, China is totally lacking in carrier ops experience. It's navy pilots are obviously not as good as US navy pilots. There is a long way to go here.

Does China have a top gun school like The United States Navy Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program (SFTI program), more popularly known as TOPGUN?