China’s Under-Construction Aircraft Carrier Isn’t the One to Worry About

[Arsalan]

What!? You mean that doesn't actually work?

alone? No it wont work. Not alone as i mentioned in my post. You think otherwise?

 

[Penguin]

alone? No it wont work. Not alone as i mentioned in my post. You think otherwise?

Humor is a great weapon.

 

[Arsalan]

Humor is a great weapon.

Well i can agree to that.

"ALONE" was the key word there. Propaganda can be a great weapons too but i do say again that chest thumping and boasting alone do not justify the "do not worry" part.

Anyway!! I think you already have got the point.

 

[Penguin]

Well i can agree to that.

"ALONE" was the key word there. Propaganda can be a great weapons too but i do say again that chest thumping and boasting alone do not justify the "do not worry" part.

Anyway!! I think you already have got the point.

Impressive nonetheless ;-)

 

[Surya 1]

1. The Russian T-50 is still using interim engines, so to say that the J-20 is "behind" fails to look at the two programs from a wider perspective.

Even with Interim engine, it has set up a new world record of climb rate. And chinese fighter with chinese engine? Better not to talk.

 

[Akasa]

Even with Interim engine, it has set up a new world record of climb rate. And chinese fighter with chinese engine? Better not to talk.

You have numbers to back up your claim of a "world record climb rate"? How would you know that the J-20 wasn't capable of achieving the same thing had the pilot pushed the limits?

 

[ebrahym]

I ought to give you a negative rating for repeating this without properly analyzing how it fits in the PNs doctrine, what threats or concerns would mandate or necessitate the use of an aircraft carrier (not a Gator Navy type LHA or LPD, but a true carrier), how the Pakistan can support such a system with no naval aviation to speak of, a limited budget compared to the cost of the carrier, no trained or qualified personal, and no facilities to support or maintain such an asset.

Stop repeating this, it's getting tiresome. You do know that these are major investments and simply having the asset doesn't equal the capability to use it, right? Thailand has an older carrier, but it almost never leaves port, they have few qualified pilots and few aircraft carrier capable airframes, and little monetary assets to support the platform. It's a white elephant that'd be better replaced with a dock landing ship. Simply having the carrier, like Thailand, doesn't equal the capability to use it.

Or replaced with a hybrid like an Afloat Forward Staging Base.

Pakistan should not build a carrier. It can't afford one, they don't fit into Pakistan's doctrine of coastal/near shore defense, it doesn't have people qualified to maintain, build or staff one, it doesn't have pilots or carrier capable aircraft, it doesn't have ships that'd be able to support extended carrier ops, like these:

Pakistan should NOT build an aircraft carrier. At most it should invest in an LSD type of ship to support limited amphibious operations.

Or an LPD, but not a carrier (short or long deck).

If you can't explain how Pakistan would support, maintain, staff and afford the cost of the ship and how it fits into Pakistan current or future doctrine, then stop writing about it. It's getting tiresome and reeks greatly of ignorance.



A good trade off in my estimation, and Russia's Kuznetsov is having them removed too (albeit not at the moment, it's a planned refit), in place of increased hanger space.

Really a unique floating castle. Other carriers have air defense missiles beyond the types of ESSM (some having a VLS too. Japan's Hyuga comes to mind, using its VLS for both ESSMS and ASROC), but none have the offensive firepower the Kuznetsov and her kin did in terms of missiles.



So claims the fool that can't properly support their views or explain how or why the PN even needs or supports these assets, just repeating the same broken claim that the PN should build a career as if stuck on repeat.

Try answering my questions. Why does the PN need one? How do its current ships, being mostly frigates and missile boats, support extended carrier ops? Where's the money come from? How does Pakistan rectify not having carrier capable aircraft of personal or maintenance support? You can't actually answer those questions can you?

So you resort to insulting me instead.

you could have saved ur fingers a lot of trouble if you would have considered ignoring
i mean i want a private jet but neither can i fly it nor can fill it with gas and can certainly not afford it

 

[Surya 1]

You have numbers to back up your claim of a "world record climb rate"? How would you know that the J-20 wasn't capable of achieving the same thing had the pilot pushed the limits?

Yes, I have the number. If I quote that than do you promise to quite this forum of stop trolling here. I have seen and read a lot about your plane and I am sure that it can not match Mig 21 in speed. When your pilot fly that with full power, you can come here with that reference. We know very well the capability of J 20 and why its designer sacked.

 

[Penguin]

It was published on internet and therefore true
http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/02/russian-5th-generation-fighter-jet-t-50.html

According to internet, for F-22 it is 350m/s.
http://aircraft.wikia.com/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor

Su-27S climb rate= 357 m/s
Typhoon climb rate 359 m/s
MiG-29A climb rate = 368 m/s
Rafale climb rate 370 m/s
F-15C climb rate = 376m/s