Chinese Aircraft Carrier Liaoning vs INS Vikramaditya

[Superboy]

MiG-29K being two seater is multi role. J-15 being one seater is primarily air superiority.

 

[shree835]

mig-29k is just economical,nothing special as far as equipment is concerned vis a vis f-16 block 52
now for now we may be happy but 5 years from now these will need an upgrade to be relevant and it better be a big one

This is why Rafale and F-35 is under consideration... Here we need to Ignore CHINI Fan boys.

 

[Superboy]

F-35C not operational till 2019 at the earliest. By then, who knows, maybe China would have F-35 from America. Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

 

[he-man]

This is why Rafale and F-35 is under consideration... Here we need to Ignore CHINI Fan boys.

f-35 has no chance at all

yes i would have liked rafale for even iac-1,not the shoddy mig-29k

 

[Genesis]

I got one question, the Mig 29 probably fits better on these kinds of carriers than J-15s. Hence the Russians are using Mig 29.

Now, why is it that some can accept that Russians accepting the MIG as a sign that MIG in this particular circumstance is better than SU-33 and it's brother J-15, but can't accept that the only carrier Russians operate is the sister ship of the Chinese carrier and hence if we are to go by this logic, the Liaoning would be better.


As to training and experience? That remains to be seen.

BTW, this report is supper biased, and some people call us the country that spews propaganda.

 

[he-man]

every country has fanboys
personally i hate such ppl

 

[sancho]

Isn't Russia replacing the its Su-33's (J-15 is Chinese copy of Su-33), on its only aircraft carrier, with Mig-29Ks??

Su 33 => (navalised Su 27) air superiority fighter
Mig 29K => multi role fighter
J15 => (navalised J11, most likely B version) multi role fighter

The Russians are replacing a single role fighter with a multi role fighter, that will be operated mainly by IN, instead of developing a navalised Su 35 in small numbers and for their own navy only.

 

[Superboy]

J-15 is mainly air superiority like F-14, not multi role like F/A-18.

 

[DeathInvader]

How can someone even compare a fully mission capable AC and a well experienced CBG with some test bed AC with a navy which has never operated an AC... Even if Varyag is bigger its of no use.. In a battle its the CBG and no the AC alone that is fighting. Indian Navy has been operating ACs ( CBGs) since more than half a century now. Mig-29 is fully tested and mission capable and someone had a thought of comparing it with j-15's naval version which is still not fully tested. It will take PLAN atleast 20-25 years. Even if PLAN has better equipments it is the experience that matters. Dare IN if you have the guts

 

[HariPrasad]

this Indian carrier is tiny carrier and a complete piece of junk.

The Liaoning is part of the Kuznetsov class carrier which there are two and the other being part of the Russian navy.

The Liaoning was supposed to be the latest carrier for the USSR before they collapsed.

The Indian Mig-29K is a piece of junk that has been shot down by everyone.

The J-15 is based on the Su-33. Any Sukhoi is better than any cheap Mig.

Indians talking sh*t again

There is no comparison between the size and capabilities of the Liaoning vs that Indian joke.



Liaoning is 65,000 tonnes.

Nice try

Some Horrible truth of J 15 in words of Chinese Scientist. J 31 is no difference.

TAIPEI — 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.
Roger Cliff, a China defense specialist for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, said this is “one of the reasons why sky-jump carriers can’t be considered to be equivalent to full-size carriers with catapults.”

A number of unanswered questions are raised by the SMN report, Kashin said, including the amount of fuel on board, carrier speed, wind speed and direction.

Cliff also raises issues with SMN’s conclusions. “It doesn’t make sense to me that the J-15 can take off with YJ-83s but not PL-12s, since the YJ-83 weighs about 1,800 pounds and the PL-12 weighs about 400 pounds.”

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.

Chinese Media Takes Aim at J-15 Fighter | Defense News | defensenews.com

 

[GR!FF!N]

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. “

that part isn't right.Mig-29K has 9 hard points,while J-15 has 12 and both carries some 6000 kgs of weaponary,but most probably engine is the reason.weak engine doesn't allow J-15 to take with full weight.but then again,WS-10A does create more thrust than Al-31F,while J-15 is lighter than Su-33.so why can't it??

 

[Superboy]

J-15 is typically armed with fourteen PL-12 for air superiority / fleet air defense. There is no problem with weight in this role.

 

[HariPrasad]

J-15 is typically armed with fourteen PL-12 for air superiority / fleet air defense. There is no problem with weight in this role.

Than it is not an air superiority Plane nor multi role fighter.

 

[cnleio]

Just watch out ur head