J15 vs MIG29k, Naval Tejas

[Anony]

I still don't get the importance of naval Tejas. As if it is operated by an aircraft carrier,it will be from INS Vishal, i.e. IAC 2. But again IAC-2 will not enter service before 2025. And guys I think by 2025 China will have atleast 2 AC and j 31 operating from both of them. Thus we must embark on N-AMCA for post 2025 and not on N-LCA.

 

[seven7seven]

If the intention of this thread is to have an informative and objective discussion of the various aspects of these aircrafts, then that's great. However, after reading through most of this thread and threads like this (where Chinese and Indian systems are pitted against one another), it always comes down to Indians thinking Chinese planes are cheap, copied junk with no creative input from China at all, and Chinese believing Indian planes are substandard export versions, delivered late and overpriced from being price-gouged by the supplying nation.

It would be nice to actually have a proper discussion on these fighter jets without the National p*ssing contest but I guess that's too much to ask for.

 

[jhungary]

Actually, there are a lot more to consider rathre than 1 on 1 capability.

I don't know what the Indian Carrier Doctorine is, nor do i know the Chinese, but in the USA, it's How many fighter on air vs time for turning them around.

So, we have a Ready 5,10,15 and Alert 5,10,15 system

Then the next thing is to look at your onboard command and control facility.

The third thing will be the ground crew quality. (How fast to refuel, rearm a plane)

The fourth thing will be the Area of Operation.

You will not go in the air 1 on 1, so talking about how good one aircraft is useless. YOu need to combine tactics, pilot quality, ground crew quality, Command quality and your carrier operation limit to say who will win a naval engagement.

P.S I know my post have not had a lot of info, i just hurt my finger playing basketball today so i don't want to type a lot. I will come back to this post when my finger feelin better

 

[sancho]

If the intention of this thread is to have an informative and objective discussion of the various aspects of these aircrafts, then that's great. However, after reading through most of this thread and threads like this (where Chinese and Indian systems are pitted against one another), it always comes down to Indians thinking Chinese planes are cheap, copied junk with no creative input from China at all, and Chinese believing Indian planes are substandard export versions, delivered late and overpriced from being price-gouged by the supplying nation.

It would be nice to actually have a proper discussion on these fighter jets without the National p*ssing contest but I guess that's too much to ask for.

Indeed, but national pride is a problem especially when we have Indian and Pakistani fanboys facing eachother, but when you then also have Chinese once, you the majority of good members won't join the disussions, because they know the thread will be de-railed pretty fast.

Another problem is, that you actually have only the Mig 29K as a base with available specs, while N-LCA, J15 and in the long term J31 are only under development and most of what we can discuss would be based on speculations anyway.
We mainly can say J15 is based on Su33, but with modernised features, which might make it better than the Mig 29K. N-LCA is a fighter that is developed because of pride and not performance in mind, so you can't take it seriously today and not by the time it might be available.

 

[Anony]

I do accept the pride theory associated with N-LCA and I myself have condemned it, but talking about comparison between Mig 29K and J 15, I have already posted before on page no. 11 that why Mig 29k is a better choice.

Yes, I have taken Su 27k data as the base for this comparison, as I found it can only best be taken as others are pure speculations.

And also considering that Chinese actually occupied one of the prototype of Su 27k i.e. T-10k-3 which was way different from final aircraft, as after that 5 more prototypes were developed before coming out with first serial production variant for user trial, that's why I believe that J 15 will anyway inferior than Su 27k as Russian technology of 90's are comparable and better than present Chinese technology as far as aviation technology is concerned.

I do accept the pride theory associated with N-LCA and I myself have condemned it, but talking about comparison between Mig 29K and J 15, I have already posted before on page no. 11 that why Mig 29k is a better choice.

Yes, I have taken Su 27k data as the base for this comparison, as I found it can only best be taken as others are pure speculations.

And also considering that Chinese actually occupied one of the prototype of Su 27k i.e. T-10k-3 which was way different from final aircraft, as after that 5 more prototypes were developed before coming out with first serial production variant for user trial, that's why I believe that J 15 will anyway inferior than Su 27k as Russian technology of 90's are comparable and better than present Chinese technology as far as aviation technology is concerned.

 

[sancho]

Now comparing Mig 29K with j 15.
I think India made a very good decision to go with Mig 29k, because the only back draw is the payload capacity of mig 29k 5.5 ton as against 8-9 ton of j 15. Rest all stands in favour of Mig 29K.

Which is wrong because of many reasons, but to start with, taking Su 27K data and not J11 data for a comparison was a major mistake, because the J15 is not based on the old Russian version anymore and has several modernisations too.
Secondly, IN didn't chose Mig 29K, they had no other option because the carrier deal was a combined one and the Su 33 was neither be able to be operated from our carriers, nor in production anymore!

1. Avionics: Mig 29K is considered 4++ generation fighter

Just like J11 or J15

2. RCS : Mig 29K has reduced RCS

Just like J11 or J15, because they all added some composites materials and RAM coatings, which means a similar reduction of the RCS is more than likely. The problem though is, that the Flankers carry all their fuel internally, while the Mig will need additional external fuel tanks, so in the same role with the same range/endurance requirements, the RCS of the Mig will rise, J15s won't!

3. RADAR:

See above and keep in mind that it is likely that J15 might get similar radar and avionics as J11B, which could be even an AESA radar with a way bigger diameter than what we have in the Mig.

4. Weapons: Mig 29K can carry all the present modern A2A and A2G missiles

Wrong, because it can't carry heavier Russians A2G weapons as out MKIs does. The heaviest weapons known for them so far are KAB 500, Kh 35 and 31 missiles and since Brahmos mini is not available anytime soon, speculating about the addition of it, won't lead anywhere.

 

[Anony]

Which is wrong because of many reasons, but to start with, taking Su 27K data and not J11 data for a comparison was a major mistake, because the J15 is not based on the old Russian version anymore and has several modernisations too.
Secondly, IN didn't chose Mig 29K, they had no other option because the carrier deal was a combined one and the Su 33 was neither be able to be operated from our carriers, nor in production anymore!



Just like J11 or J15



Just like J11 or J15, because they all added some composites materials and RAM coatings, which means a similar reduction of the RCS is more than likely. The problem though is, that the Flankers carry all their fuel internally, while the Mig will need additional external fuel tanks, so in the same role with the same range/endurance requirements, the RCS of the Mig will rise, J15s won't!



See above and keep in mind that it is likely that J15 might get similar radar and avionics as J11B, which could be even an AESA radar with a way bigger diameter than what we have in the Mig.



Wrong, because it can't carry heavier Russians A2G weapons as out MKIs does. The heaviest weapons known for them so far are KAB 500, Kh 35 and 31 missiles and since Brahmos mini is not available anytime soon, speculating about the addition of it, won't lead anywhere.

Just like J 15, J 11 is also a copy of Su 27. Thus it is the same fighter having one air force and one naval version. Same way as J 11 is a copy of su 27, j 15 is a copy of T-10k-3 which was one of the prototype of naval version of Su 27K at early stage.

It's true that J 15 use certain amount of composites but that is not even 15% by weight. But the thing that matter most is the use of composites as surface area, like tejas use composites at 85% of it's surface area, mig 29k use at more than 65% of it's surface area, J 15 cann't be more than 35%, as it's design can only allow it's wing to be made of composites.

Now AESA radar is distant future, the reason why I don't consider N-LCA as it will come at way future.

I accept that diameter of the antenna of radar of Su 27 will be bigger, that's why I have already posted that it will able to detect Mig 29k with RCS 1m square from 100 km and will able to track from 85 km whereas Mig 29k will able to detect fighter of 1m square from 80km and track it from 65-70 km. But the point is Su 27 has RCS between 10~15 m2. Even the use of composites can only bring it down to 6~8 m2. That's why Mig 29k even with smaller radar will able to detect J 15 from well above 150km and will start tracking it from 130km distance.


Range, as I have mention before is not the main factor when operating from Sea as aircraft remain at 500km-600km radius from it's carrier. And Mig 29k have radius of 800km with internal fuel. No need to carry external fuel.

 

[Anony]

Dude if Indian Navy chose Mig 29k by compulsion and not by choice, then why Russian Navy also went for mig 29k and not Su 27k and don't talk childish like many others that because Su 27k didn't had fund lines. It is because if initial 29 mig 29k orders from IN can open production line for Mig 29k, then that can also be achieved by Russian navy's order for Su 27k.

The reason they chose Russian Navy chose Mig 29k because of the following reasons:-

1. For operating from AC, medium weight fighters are best, that's today whole world is shifting towards medium weight fighters than heavy fighters. As heavy fighters can never fly with their all up weight from the deck of a AC. This is the reason even China is coming up with J 31 project, a medium weight fighter for naval operation.

2. Today's Mig 29k is way superior than Su 27K in terms of avionics and can even perform better maneuverability.

3. Range is not a big factor for carrier based operation. Combat radius of 700km-800km is enough. The same reason why all the fighters of today's or coming decades have the similar range.

4. For naval operation one don't only need to do air defense, but also ground operation i.e. to engage enemy's naval assets such as frigates, destroyers, etc.

 

[sancho]

Just like J 15, J 11 is also a copy of Su 27.

Designwise, but not technologically, because the Chinese modernised them too!

It's true that J 15 use certain amount of composites but that is not even 15% by weight.

As reported by a source close to RAC MiG, the company told about significant increase of share of composites in the fuselage structure of MiG-29 fighters (from 2-3% to 10-12%). In particular, half of the jet’s external surface area is made of composites. The composites help decrease the aircraft’s weight and increase the airframe’s corrosion resistance and stiffness.

MiG and Sukhoi have signed a cooperation agreement in the network of development of UAVs - News - Russian Aviation - RUAVIATION.COM

Range, as I have mention before is not the main factor when operating from Sea as aircraft remain at 500km-600km radius from it's carrier. And Mig 29k have radius of 800km with internal fuel. No need to carry external fuel.

Which is wrong, because you count clean configs again, but with the addition of any weapon, especially the heavier once, range, endurance will decrease. Even for CAP roles they will carry at least a single fuel tank, to have sufficient endurance which is more important when you lack enough tankers. So be it in regard of RCS, or range / endurance, external fuel tanks play a role for the Mig.

Dude if Indian Navy chose Mig 29k by compulsion and not by choice, then why Russian Navy also went for mig 29k and not Su 27k.

Because the Su 33 is not in production anymore and they just needed a stopgap solution now, since their long term solution is a naval Pak Fa. Now India is the biggest operator of Mig 29Ks, they was able to divert have of the funding costs to us and are trying the same with the naval Pak Fa as well. The Sukhoi CEO itself has stated several times, that HAL could do the complete naval re-design, because that is the only way to divert costs for this version to India again, otherwise Russia has to fund it alone.

The reason they chose Russian Navy chose Mig 29k because of the following reasons:-

1. For operating from AC, medium weight fighters are best, that's today whole world is shifting towards medium weight fighters than heavy fighters.

Not really, Russian, Chinese and even US navies prefer heavy class fighters (USN prefered a naval F22 initially and the fact that such a model was offered, was even a reason why YF22 won over YF23). Moreover, you are completelly ignoring what kind of carriers we are talking here, all these navies operate big carriers, the US even with catapults, while will operate only smaller carriers with ski-jump take off. That's the limitation why we can't use heavy fighters, from such small decks, because they have to take off unassisted!

2. Today's Mig 29k is way superior than Su 27K in terms of avionics and can even perform better maneuverability.

True, but J15 is not an old Su 27K, but a modernised Su 33 varient!

4. For naval operation one don't only need to do air defense, but also ground operation i.e. to engage enemy's naval assets such as frigates, destroyers, etc.

True and the J15 is far superior here as well, more payload, more weapon stations, better flight performance.

 

[Anony]

@ Sancho.

I accept that Chinese has modernised Su 27 prototype T -10k-3, because it was way old design of 1980's, but the question is how much, the capability of China aviation technology as compared to Russia. And stop calling that J 15 will be based on Su 33 variant as Russia has never sold any Su 33 to China and the prototype that China acquired from Ukraine was of Su 27k without any of the modern suites designed in late 1980's and was inducted by Russian Navy at that point of time whereas much improved version of Su 27k later known as Su 33 in late 90's which first prototype flew in the year 1999 and it get completed by 2005 after which it was offered to both China and India. Though India reject it based on the following reasons:-

1. The size of the aircraft (specially wt. since it comes with folded wings and take almost same deck width with folded wings)

2. In Russian journal and also in wikipedia it is clearly mention that Mig 29k can perform strike operation better than Su 33.

3. Threat Perception: As India will never send it's AC deep in Chinese waters to do combat role, it would rather be interested in protecting IOC region for which combat radius of 500km-600km is good wheras Mig 29k combat radius is 800km and it can fly upto 2000km with internal fuel. Though I found your point regarding decrease of range when weapons will also be onboard but still I doubt that will able to decrease the range more than 15% - 20%. Even then combat radius of more than 600km hold good.

4. Mig 29k avionics is way superior to Su 33 admitted at Russian newspaper.


From the above points it should be cleared that Mig 29k was not a compromise but choice and also J 15 is based on old age Su 27k not modern Su 33, though J 15 avionics will be better than Su 27k but not Su 33 let alone Mig 29K.

I have already accepted that payload is the drawback of Mig 29k (5.5t) compared to Su 27k/Su 33/J 15 (close to 8t). Probably one extra ton would have nullified the equation as even J 15 though capable will never able to carry full 8t as that much take off weight will not be possible even when operating from Varyag.

Yes RCS of Mig 29k will increase to some extent when weapon will be loaded but that is true even for J 15. I only want to make this point that even with slightly larger radar, J 15 will not able to detect Mig 29k before.

 

[Agent_47]

Not really, Russian, Chinese and even US navies prefer heavy class fighters (USN prefered a naval F22 initially and the fact that such a model was offered, was even a reason why YF22 won over YF23). Moreover, you are completelly ignoring what kind of carriers we are talking here, all these navies operate big carriers, the US even with catapults, while will operate only smaller carriers with ski-jump take off. That's the limitation why we can't use heavy fighters, from such small decks, because they have to take off unassisted!

Which is more feasible N-AMCA or N-FGFA ?
(considering IAC2 will complete only around 2023-25)

 

[Anony]

Which is more feasible N-AMCA or N-FGFA ?
(considering IAC2 will complete only around 2023-25)

Dude you r asking a hypothetical question. Hence no specific answer for this can U get. But still trying to judge and answer ur question based on following two assumptions:-

1. Firstly I am taking the completion of IAC2 to 2027-28. Since N-AMCA probably will not be available by 2023.

2. If I consider that AMCA match the performance parameters as said by DRDO or atleast consider it to match technologically to N-FGFA then I would like to go with N-AMCA. The reasons are as follows:-

2.1 IAC2 will be 65000t AC similar to that of varyag. Hence, N-FGFA will not able to perform to it's full potential from the deck of IAC2 as it would not support the all up weight of N-FGFA. Max of 26t-28t all up weight class of fighters will able to take off from it with 26t be more ideal. Adding to that for catapult AC thrust while landing need also to be taken care.

2.2 As stated by DRDO AMCA will have twice the weapon carrying capability of LCA tejas. Thus 8t to 10t(4t of Lca mk1 and 5t of LCA mk2) whichever will be applicable is enough payload. N-AMCA will have a combat radius of 850km-950km on internal fuel which is ok.

2.3 Since AMCA is an indigenous product, we can make any technological changes whenever necessary and AMCA will also be cost effective as well as it will reduce dependence on foreign product.

2.4 One of the most important factor, but I am putting it at last as I doubt DRDO ability on this point which if taken will make the choice very simple is the use of laser as weapon. As stated by Dr. V.K. Saraswat in an interview that "AMCA will be better than any 5th gen machine flying today, as it will have the ability to fire laser beam which will be one of the important weapon of post 2025."

 

[sancho]

@ Sancho.

I accept that Chinese has modernised Su 27 prototype T -10k-3, because it was way old design of 1980's, but the question is how much, the capability of China aviation technology as compared to Russia. And stop calling that J 15 will be based on Su 33 variant as Russia has never sold any Su 33 to China and the prototype that China acquired from Ukraine was of Su 27k without any of the modern suites designed in late 1980's and was inducted by Russian Navy at that point of time whereas much improved version of Su 27k later known as Su 33 in late 90's which first prototype flew in the year 1999 and it get completed by 2005 after which it was offered to both China and India.

That should have been the important question for you from the begining and before you simply assume that the Mig is better, but you still didn't understood many points.

- Su 27 / Su 33 (naval Su 27 and the final designation of the Su 27K, not a different varient: Sukhoi Company (JSC) - Airplanes - Military Aircraft - Su-33 - Historical background) and IAFs Mig 29s were air superiority fighters, with no or very limited A2G capabilities only

- Su 30 / 35 / Mig 29SMT / Mig 29K and Chinese J11 series are multi role fighters

- J15 is a naval version of J11, with the know how for navalising gathered of from the Ukraine

=> So yes, the Mig 29K as a multi role fighter is clearly better in A2G as the air superiority Su 33, but not as the J15, which is a multi role fighter as well

Also, you just need to check the PAF or Chinese section of the forum and get several good infos about current Chinese multi mode radars for example in JF17 or J10A. Then you would have seen that they are technologically the same generation as Zhuk ME in our Mig 29s and performancewise nearly as capable too. That doesn't mean that China already has something comparable to BARS or IRBIS-E radars, but even these chinese radars in a Flanker nose offer high detection ranges. Their EW systems already have more sensors than our MKI have, so are by far not stuck in the old Su 27 times as you might think. China is able to offer propper 4th gen fighters and techs today.

To sum it up once again, Mig 29K and J15 are 4th to 4.5 gen fighter (J15 might even come directly with AESA) with similar modernisation levels, but performancewise the J15 will be the better fighter, supported by more fighters on a bigger carrier.

Which is more feasible N-AMCA or N-FGFA ?
(considering IAC2 will complete only around 2023-25)

In theory it is possible, but practically it depends on too many things. Russians still insist on their 2015 timeframe to induct Pak Fa, which means 2023 for a naval version is more than possible, but unless they have the money to fund not only the fighter development, but also the new carriers I don't see it coming. India might even insist on an FGFA version, but even the IAF version will be delayed now.
AMCA has a chance only if we get credible assistance from foreign partners and if we develop it as a carrier fighter in first place. Combine the Rafale deal with Dassault assistance for N-AMCA, fix the Kaveri/Snecma co-development, possibly GaN AESA radar development with Thales. But if we keep our habits, DRDO will try to do anything alone, IAF and IN will ask for different requirements and the fighter will be delayed until MKI has to be replaced.

 

[My-Analogous]

I still don't get the importance of naval Tejas. As if it is operated by an aircraft carrier,it will be from INS Vishal, i.e. IAC 2. But again IAC-2 will not enter service before 2025. And guys I think by 2025 China will have atleast 2 AC and j 31 operating from both of them. Thus we must embark on N-AMCA for post 2025 and not on N-LCA.

wise words ........ now i note your name. A true comparison without geo boundary (favor).

 

[scarcry]

The reason they chose Russian Navy chose Mig 29k because of the following reasons:-

Now in a war scenario, Mig 29K will prove more effective because navy will be using it in striking mission which is it's specialty. Su33 is not a attack fighter and failed even to impress Russia to use it in present day war scenario. It has older avionics and 8g(J 15 has 9g) maneuverability compared to 12g of Mig 29K.
Thrust to weight ratio:
j15 - 0.83(0.87 speculated with newer engine but have no confirmation)
Mig 29K - 0.97

Range

j15 have combat radius of 1000 km compared to 700 km of Mig 29K but in war fighters don't go more than 300km - 400km radius away from it's carrier. And again China will not use Su 33 to attack on Indian soil.

Payload

j15 can carry 9 ton payload as against 6 ton of newer Mig 29K for Indian navy. Odds in favour of j15 in this case.

RCS

j15 has a very large RCS of more than 5m2 as against 1m2 of Mig 29K which Indian Navy is currently using(Note:- RCS of Mig 29 used by IAF is 2.5m2 not to be confused.) Thus, any IN ships can detect j15 from distance above 200km away as opposed of Mig 29K which can only be detected when it is 50km-70km away. But BVR missiles can target a ship from more than at least 110 km away.
(Note: 290 km range Brahmos cann't be fitted with Mig 29K,thus cann't be considered.)

J15 is a heavy class fighter,
thats the reason it cant be turned around immediately and sent back in battle
as it needs heavy maintenance as compared to the lighter MiG-29k

this was figured out by US navy first, hence they opted for a lighter fighter
replacing the F-14 with F-18

2nd was the IN with more than 4 decades of experience of operating CSF
IN choose to go for MiG-29k, China on the other hand is a new comer
and is certainly not aware of this fact in practical terms.

Russia too realized the same in discussions with IN and choose to go for a lighter MiG-29k
in comparison to Su-33 as a result Su-33 assembly line was shut down and dismantled.

<j15 is copied from a Ukranian prototype going by jf17, j11 and j16(su30mkk copy ... unbelievable isnt it? ) I expect avionics to be 70% of what mig29k is. As for AESA these frauds are using a planar radar calling it AESA.