China wants catapult launch carriers

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

ford2go

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2007, 18:13

Unread post17 Oct 2016, 06:34

Sorry that I don't have it in fromt of me now, but popularmechanics.com had an article about Chinese efforts to get catapult launch capability. Not for their existing ski jump, of course. And not for the one currently under construction. But plans are in for the 3rd carrier -- launch date 2030 or so.

Apparently they've already built an on land test facility and they want to get the electromagnetic tech -- not steam.

hj
Offline

mrigdon

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2015, 22:03

Unread post17 Oct 2016, 07:07

I don't think people give Popular Mechanics enough credit. I'm still confounded that they didn't get a Pulitzer Prize for their work exposing the Aurora spy plane.
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post17 Oct 2016, 21:14

The HMAS Melbourne had a steam catapult. No doubt the Chinese studied the design.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post17 Oct 2016, 23:19

I'm sure they will get it eventually, assuming their empire doesn't collapse in the next two decades or so. Maybe even if it does.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline
User avatar

PhillyGuy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2006, 03:07

Unread post19 Oct 2016, 01:45

the good thing is they wanted to skip steam and copy the new US ELM launchers which don't even work yet so that's a nice goose chase for them. :P
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7724
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post19 Oct 2016, 03:37

EMALS don't work as yet? Got a link?
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5858
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post19 Oct 2016, 03:40

popcorn wrote:EMALS don't work as yet? Got a link?


No. He's a troll.
"There I was. . ."
Online

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4952
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post19 Oct 2016, 16:07

I want a cat carrier capable carrier too, doesn't mean I'll get one though.. .:)

It's amazing to see how far behind other nations are in carrier development. Doubly so, given Washington's successful use of them over decades as both a political and military tool. Russia's carriers don't look to be anything special, being hamstrung by that ramp system they use. I think they fly Mig-29k's now? So it'd be those vs. USN Hornets, Tanker Hornets, SuperHornets, Growlers and whatever new SH variation Boeing dreams up next, lol.

I'm waiting for the E-18F Super Hornet AWACS plane next :)
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2913
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post17 Jun 2022, 08:29

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/17/chin ... index.html

China has launched its 3rd aircraft carrier "Fujian" equipped with 3 EMALs launch rails on Jun 17, 2022. Slightly bigger than the CV16 & CV17, grossing above 80000 tons, the ship took 2 years from keel lay to launch (roughly same time as CV17). If CV17 schedule is a guide, it will take ~2 years to commission this CV ie 2024.

The J-31 fighter has not been seen testing from a cat-launch yet so the carrier wing is expected to initially field J-15Ts, together with the Kj-600 AEW & Z-18 helos.

This US acquires CVNs at ~5 year intervals, so if China maintains its every 5 year launch rate, it will eventually catch up to USN CV numbers, even though its CVs are not deemed as capable as USN CVNs.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1109
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post17 Jun 2022, 11:14

So Fujian is essentially the size of a Kitty Hawk-class carrier. I wonder if they'll build a few more ships of this class before proceeding to a new class of larger carriers the size of a Nimitz or Ford.

I do wonder what the size of the ship's air wing is. As it is, the J-15 will be a stiff competitor to the Super Hornet. Honestly, we should be investing much more in the F-35C and the F/A-XX. For some reason we're also not investing much in the F/A-XX, the budget is a small fraction of the NGAD. Someone want to tell me what they're thinking at Naval Air Forces? Because it makes no sense to me.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2913
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post18 Jun 2022, 02:35

CV16/17 has ~24 J-15s each with other aircraft mainly ka-31 aew and z-18 helos occupying the remaining. cv capacity is ~50. Current assumption is that CV-18 (pennant not confirmed) will double that.
Online

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4952
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post18 Jun 2022, 13:59

So this new carrier looks like a step up, albeit not to the degree of a Nimtz/Ford class..

I might be mistaken, but I counted 3 catapaults, not 4 as on USN CVN's. Not sure how much of a difference that makes insofar as launch/recovery cycles. With the J-15 and KJ-600 alone, it should be capable of contesting large amounts of airspace. But as for power projection, I'm not sure how good it will be given the J-15's rather limited air to ground capability. At least as I understand the current version. They'll likely require the navalised J-31 for this role (or a large drone), with a much lower RCS and much more robut air to ground weaponry/sensors.

A J-15 buddy tanker wouldn't surprise me, in fact I'd expect it to work in concert with the J-31/rest of the air wing..
Offline

drago

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2021, 01:53

Unread post18 Jun 2022, 16:13

6E9E388A-EE25-484A-9C47-4C36E3D2313D.jpeg
003

6A0187A8-D73F-4FC3-A4A4-376CB2195008.jpeg

50BAA440-F497-4650-8366-41147F0AD4AB.jpeg
Offline

tphuang

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2018, 02:42

Unread post18 Jun 2022, 20:40

This is likely the only 003 they will build. What constrains China's blue water ambitions isn't the carrier itself but rather the noisy nuclear submarines. Until that gets resolved, Chinese carriers are limited inside first island chain.

Yes, J-15B/T is likely to operate as buddy tanker in the same way that super hornets do. They likely will have a J-15D, which will probably be broadly comparable to Growler and inferior to J-16D. J-35s imo is probably about 5 years away from achieving IOC. While this will join service in 3 or 4 years, I would put the real operational capabilities with J-35 and KJ-600 probably at 2027 to 2029.
Offline

jessmo112

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post18 Jun 2022, 23:10

China has maybe 50+ J-15s ATM which isn't enough to fit 3-4 carriers. They could have the J-35 before 2030 but your betting on.

1. China to finally achieve engine parity with the west and get a credible power plant on the J-35.
As of right now the power and reliability of the
RD series of engine I'd not up to the task of what would ne required for naval deployment.
Someone mentioned before on this board about launching in only burners to achieve takeoff weight.
RD series will burn out fast with that.

2. Even if they get an engine to naval standards, do you expect to throw more wing weight, and gear on the thing, and all will go smooth?
We only need to look back to the hornet wing drop issue, and the F-35C hook issue, to see how complicated this is
To bet on no delays or problems is a bad bet.

3. Full integration.

The J-15 is a dead end. It's already coming to the fleet outdated. And it's seriously flawed.
IMO if they wanted to copy a 4th generation fighters they should have copied the Super bugg design.
A massive naval aviation short fall is China problem.
Next

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], sprstdlyscottsmn, zhangmdev and 14 guests