What's new

Russian Expert: Liaoning-Test Platform, Vikramaditya-Fully operable combat capable

The same would apply to the Mig-29.

Let people who think a 45,000 tonne carrier will be more capable than a near 70,000 tonne carrier keep believing this.

Good clever point, that is zipper for hindustanis.
 
Why should the Liaoning only be able to operate under perfect visibility and calm seas only? 

Well that's what the experts says(after careful scrutiny) and if you are seriously asking me that then you don't know the history behind the Varyag and its former glory.
 
You‘d expect the Russians to say so,would you not?

Otherwise they would have made India a complete fool,and so obviously。

No?:rofl:

By the way,the Vikramaditya has no AESA。Why?India can't afford the radar or Russia is not in a position to provide same?

And the ship has no air-defence system?Why?Is that standard practice for IN?If so,then :enjoy:

Mig-29K is a piece of sh1t。Still India relies on the Russians to train its pilots?Why can't India do it alone?
 
You are planning to return to your home in Mars don't worry isro is doing everything it can to make your flight "Aaram deh"
Chinese are paying more $$ who told you that when india is the largest importer of weapons system.
Chinese only buy russian Engine and we buy Tank,submarine,aircraft carrier,atgm,air craft and list goes on


Su 30 MKK is an Engine?

Currently they are negotiating for Su35.

Ahhh, yes i remenber when there were reports from the Russian media that said because Russia refused to sell China arresting gears that China wouldn't be able to build it herself. And guess what happened ?

If we make a Vikramaditya vs. Liaoning comparison.

CV-16 Liaoning
304m long
72m wide
10,5m draught
65000 ton
2200 crew
30 knots speed
16 to 24 Shenyang J-15

R-33 INS Vikramaditya
284m long
60m wide
9,5m draught
45400 ton
1600 crew
30 knots speed
16 MiG-29K Fulcrum-D

The Liaoning is bigger than the Vikramaditya meaning it can carry more food, fuel and crew and has space for recreation for the crew. The Liaoning has a bar, gym, postal office and even a small supermarket on board. And during the refit of the Liaoning they have taken away almost all of the weapons systems of the original design. Meaning the ship has become lighter and more fuel efficient and has opened up space inside for storage of food and weapons. Extending its endurance at sea. The Vikramaditya also has all of her weapons removed, but they also added a lot to the structure too like the ski jump or the extention to the width of the flight deck and the arresting system that was not part of the original design. So there may even have been a net gain in weight for the Vikramaditya.

The problem with the Vikramaditya starts with her oversized and missed placed island has eaten up most of the space on the flight deck. The elevators that are placed in the middle of the flight deck has further robbed it of space. The position of the elevators has further eaten up space in the hanger deck that are 30% smaller then that of the Liaoning to begin with. The flightdeck of the Vikramaditya doesn't have any jet blast deflectors meaning that when planes take off they would need to clear the deck far behind it to avoid getting burned by the 1300°C jet blasts from the MiG-29K's. Or they will have to use the back launch position on the Vikramaditya all the time. Because the elevators are in the middle of the flight deck and not on the side means that aircraft can't come up from the hangar deck when airplanes are taking off or landing. And vice versa when planes are coming up from the hangar deck there can't be any flight ops on the flight deck. There is no space between the island and the runway leaving very little room for the deck crew to work. The MiG-29K's can only come up from the front elevator next to the island and not the back one where only helicopters can come up because its too small. I don't know if the Russians has expanded the aviation fuel tanks on the Vikramaditya, if not then its going to be very hard to maintain a high operational tempo on the Vikramaditya as the ship will run out of aviation fuel just after a few sorties! Remenber that 16 MiG-29K's guzzle up a whole lot more fuel then 12 Yak-38 Forgers. So far i haven't read anything about the Russians expanding the amount of aviation fuel the ship can carry.

The Liaoning doesn't have any of these problems !

Now the J-15 vs MiG-29K

Shenyang J-15 (taken from the SU-33)

21,9m long
max take off weight: 33000kg
max speed mach 2,17
max range 3000km
service ceiling 17000m
climb rate 48,500 ft/min
T/W 0,83
stall speed 240 km/h

MiG-29K Fulcrum-D
17,3m long
max take off weight: 24500kg
max speed mach 2+
max range 2100km
service ceiling 17500m
climb rate 65,000 ft/min
T/W 0,97
stall speed 246 km/h

based on these few stats we can say that:

in favor of the J-15: longer range, lower stall speed, heavier payload

in favor of the MiG-29K: higher service ceiling, faster climb rate, higher T/W ratio.

Both are multi-role neither is battle tested.

Note that the J-15 numbers are taken from the SU-33 so its not a completely accurate comparison.

Pl educate yourself about J 15. Look what CHinese scientist thinks about J 15.

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
 
Last edited:
:woot::china:

122947wx06563xkr6zgrn5.jpg.thumb.jpg


122957j39dah3y53ieiwis.jpg.thumb.jpg
 
The upper desk of Vikramaditya looks damn rusty, Russia just strated to learn how to build a carrier few years ago. Liaoning looks much more sharper.

Said Russian navy wanna purchased Vayag at very low price, Ukraine denied its offer cause they percieve Russian as big threat.
 
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. ..... This might prohibit it from carrying heavier munitions such as PL-12 medium-range air-to-air missiles. :cheesy:

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, ( :lol: ....PL-8 has range of 20 kms only )

......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.

This carrier with 53,000 tons is far less capable than Viki with 45,000 tons. ........... in fact the carrier is a sitting duck and a floating target. The escort ships will have to protect this carrier rather than the carrier protecting the escort ships :lol:
 
From the location of Vikra's Island structure, i could tell it is not supposed to be a carrier at the first begining. Moreover, the pole sticking out on the rear looks quite funny.

This one seems like a building done by a amateur.

This carrier with 53,000 tons is far less capable than Viki with 45,000 tons. ........... in fact the carrier is a sitting duck and a floating target. The escort ships will have to protect this carrier rather than the carrier protecting the escort ships :lol:
I don't wanna compare in this case, but Liaoning is way much better.
 
This is just sad, are we seriously comparing who suck more? Indian "carriers" or Chinese "carrier?"

US LHDs and what not are about the size of Indian carrier and bigger than the other one, it's only slightly smaller than the Chinese carrier, but most likely more capable due to experience and other equipments available.


Let's compare again, when Indian's indigenous carrier comes out of the wood works, and the first Chinese carrier goes out to see.

At this point, it's making me cry.
 
From the location of Vikra's Island structure, i could tell it is not supposed to be a carrier at the first begining. Moreover, the pole sticking out on the rear looks quite funny.

This one seems like a building done by a amateur.

I don't wanna compare in this case, but Liaoning is way much better.

Well this Aircraft carrier that 'looks' like its been built by amateurs has conducted over 778 flights trials with 88 landings :cheesy:

It has sailed 1,700 miles under India command with more than 1000 Indian sailors on board.

It can / will carry 24 Mig 29K and 10 Helicopters i.e. a total of 34 Aircrafts :D ...... In case you are wondering IN has already ordered for 45 mig 29K capable of AC operations.

Reality is Liaoning comes nowhere near Viki's capabilities. That is just the cold hard reality. Now let his information soak in.
 
You‘d expect the Russians to say so,would you not?

Otherwise they would have made India a complete fool,and so obviously。

No?:rofl:

Well what about everyone else, they seem to be saying the same thing, so unfortunately the joke's on you and your tincan.:coffee:

Chinese aircraft carrier fails to make a splash with Canadian military officials

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2013_china_report_final.pdf

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

By the way,the Vikramaditya has no AESA。Why?India can't afford the radar or Russia is not in a position to provide same?

A good plannar radar is better than a bad AESA radar any day.
The carrier’s jamming capability was demonstrated when the Sukhoi-33s, Kamovs, MiG-29s and the early warning aircraft A-50 all failed to paint it on their radars, he said. The carrier’s radar, on the contrary, could pick oncoming aircraft from a distance of 350-400 km, said Mr. Leonav.Navy to get refurbished Vikramaditya tomorrow - The Hindu


And the ship has no air-defence system?Why?Is that standard practice for IN?If so,then :enjoy:

Having fun trolling? Well you won't when the Barak will be installed, besides Liaoning can't even go into rough seas or unclear weather. LOL what does it even need airdefense for no one will need to attack that worthless tincan.

Mig-29K is a piece of sh1t。Still India relies on the Russians to train its pilots?Why can't India do it alone?

Still loads better than the J-15.
You can say that after the Brazilians were training your pilots.Why can't China do it alone?
 
Last edited:
Su 30 MKK is an Engine?

Currently they are negotiating for Su35.



Pl educate yourself about J 15. Look what CHinese scientist thinks about J 15.

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
I have seen this article and more importantly i have seen the SMN piece that this article refference to and its says non of the kind. The article is a hoax.

It's true however that the ski jump does pose limitations to a carrier and especially on the take off weight of its planes. But this is a issue that the Liaoning, Vikramaditya and the Kuznetsov share. And with the MiG-29K that has a higher stall speed then the Flankers i would say that the Vikramaditya is worse off then the Liaoning on this front.
 
I have heard a Russian expert say Mig 29 never falls down like a dead bird
 
Back
Top Bottom