Chinese aircraft carrier has major weaknesses: China Youth Daily

[Oldman1]

I'm guessing it's the holographic HUD.

Surprised they need to cover it. Anyways we are going past the need for HUD.

 

[Mitro]

What ever makes people good night sleep but the reality is what i speak

CHinese Carrier $20 million is far better and superior then Indian more then $2 billion.

Chinese J-15 is far superior then Expensive Mig 29

Chinese say their carrier is training Ship and indian say their carrier is front line ship.

Chinese carrier is operational with J-15 Fighter and indian carrier needs help to save her A$$ .

If Indian carrier see's chinese carrier with all the modern weapon system will start Sh$TTing in Indian ocean

Give them some time Chinese nuclear power carrier will be roaming all around the globe .

 

[Aegis DDG]

Surprised they need to cover it. Anyways we are going past the need for HUD.

I know. The F-35's sensor helmet is quite revolutionary. However I beilve the Isrealis created the first 'Master-slaving ' helmet technology for their F-15 Ra'ad despite the Apache Helicopter being the first weapon system to use such technology.

 

[Fsjal]

I want someone to tell me why HUDs are bad. Please, explain me why.

I heard that some planes have both HUDs and Helmet Mounted Displays.

 

[BigDaddyWatch]

Looks the same compare to the F18 cockpit. It looks like you manage to catch up to some fighter introduced in the 80s.

The 3 MFI display layout is still in use in all frontline fighters of the US. The F-16, F-15, F/A-18 and even the F-22.

USS Enterprise had the phase array decades ago on the first nuclear carrier.

And all modern USN carriers and other ships still use the phase array radars today. No new technology only improved.

And for the new cockpit on the F35.

You notice there is no need for the HUD like the Chinese aircraft.

The F-35 is a known dud and is only kept going because of politics.

F22 they have it but it was introduced in the 90s.

New improved phase array on the Ford. Kind of a contradictory on your statement.

Simply an improvement of old technology nothing new or revolutionary.

 

[chauism]

What ever makes people good night sleep but the reality is what i speak

CHinese Carrier $20 million is far better and superior then Indian more then $2 billion.

Chinese J-15 is far superior then Expensive Mig 29

Chinese say their carrier is training Ship and indian say their carrier is front line ship.

Chinese carrier is operational with J-15 Fighter and indian carrier needs help to save her A$$ .

If Indian carrier see's chinese carrier with all the modern weapon system will start Sh$TTing in Indian ocean

Give them some time Chinese nuclear power carrier will be roaming all around the globe .

Without catapult, the combat effectiveness of J-15 is indeed very limited. That is why some Indian members keep thinking that J-15 is only able to carry 2000 kg of weapon. Let me add here using ski jump to launch J-15 it could not carry full load of its fuel too, which will limit its combat radius as well. I don't know how ski jump launch will affect Mig-29K here, but when J-15 and Mig-29K are launched from Liaoning or any Indian carriers, their weapon load and range would not be that big.

 

[UKBengali]

Without catapult, the combat effectiveness of J-15 is indeed very limited. That is why some Indian members keep thinking that J-15 is only able to carry 2000 kg of weapon. Let me add here using ski jump to launch J-15 it could not carry full load of its fuel too, which will limit its combat radius as well. I don't know how ski jump launch will affect Mig-29K here, but when J-15 and Mig-29K are launched from Liaoning or any Indian carriers, their weapon load and range would not be that big.

Who told you that?

2 130KN+ turbofan engines will easily the propel a J-15 into the air with full fuel.

 

[chauism]

Who told you that?

2 130KN+ turbofan engines will easily the propel a J-15 into the air with full fuel.

From Russia's experience with Kuznetsov class carrier, taking off using ski jump by aircraft with takeoff weight exceeding some 26 tons is very difficult. The empty weight of J-15 already 17.5 tons, and its full fuel load is 9.5 tons. Yes, it might be able to launch with ski jump with full fuel load, but this also means it can not carry anymore weapons.

 

[UKBengali]

From Russia's experience with Kuznetsov class carrier, taking off using ski jump by aircraft with takeoff weight exceeding some 26 tons is very difficult. The empty weight of J-15 already 17.5 tons, and its full fuel load is 9.5 tons. Yes, it might be able to launch with ski jump with full fuel load, but this also means it can not carry anymore weapons.

SU-33 has 2 125Kn engines.

J-15 is also lighter than the Su-33 by nearly 1 tonne.

We can all do the math here.

 

[chauism]

SU-33 has 2 125Kn engines.

J-15 is also lighter than the Su-33 by nearly 1 tonne.

We can all do the math here.

The problem here is this 1 ton reduction here is not significant enough to make a difference here, because this is not just about the difference in acceleration where the weight increase can be offset by the increase in the force linearly. It is lift force we are talking about. 2L(lift force)=C(lift coeffient)*p(fluid density)*S(planform area)*v(true airspeed)^2. let's assume that C, p and S are the same for both Su-33 and J-15. v=Thrust/Weight*t. Trust/Weight=2Distance/time^2. Also since it is carrier operation the Distance has to be the same for both aircraft You can try the numbers here to see if those change is significant to grant J-15 full load of operation requirement using 26 ton as a threashold for Su-33.

 

[Superboy]

J-15 is an air superiority fighter. 12 PL-12 is plenty enough. It hardly ever carries anti ship missiles.

 

[UKBengali]

The problem here is this 1 ton reduction here is not significant enough to make a difference here, because this is not just about the difference in acceleration where the weight increase can be offset by the increase in the force linearly. It is lift force we are talking about. 2L(lift force)=C(lift coeffient)*p(fluid density)*S(planform area)*v(true airspeed)^2. let's assume that C, p and S are the same for both Su-33 and J-15. v=Thrust/Weight*t. Trust/Weight=2Distance/time^2. Also since it is carrier operation the Distance has to be the same for both aircraft You can try the numbers here to see if those change is significant to grant J-15 full load of operation requirement using 26 ton as a threashold for Su-33.

Most sites quote the WS-10A to have 132KN as opposed to 125KN on the Su-33's engines.

That is an extra 14KN of thrust at take-off . This will allow a roughly extra 6% in weight. So your 26 tons becomes 27.5 tonnes.

The J-15 will be able to take off with FULL fuel and also the FULL range of air-to-air missiles. 8 AAMs composed of 4 SD-10s and 4 PL-9s would add only an extra ~1 ton to the weight.

Remember the J-15 is initially designed to be used as a long-endurance air superiority fighter for China's first carrier.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The specs of Liaoning and J-15 given by POP3.