Author Topic: New Chinese Aircraft Carrier ! (Read 1939 times)

Gunslinger · « **Reply #30 on:** May 28, 2005, 12:16:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by spitfiremkv
I'm sure the Chinese will buy/build the navalized Flanker in the future. As a pure fighter, that thing kicks F18s ass, especially the big heavy Super Hornets.

Sure in a one on one with the equivilent amount of training.....but that's not how modern day tactics work.

Sikboy · « **Reply #31 on:** May 28, 2005, 12:58:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Sure in a one on one with the equivilent amount of training.....but that's not how modern day tactics work.

Nor do modern day tactics pit carriers 1v1.

-Sik

Gunslinger · « **Reply #32 on:** May 28, 2005, 02:16:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy
Nor do modern day tactics pit carriers 1v1.

-Sik

no but that's far from what we are talking about here.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #33 on:** May 28, 2005, 02:21:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pooh21
theres a Navy Cross waiting to happen.

Sikboy · « **Reply #34 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:03:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
no but that's far from what we are talking about here.

I'm sorry. I misunderstood you when you asked if it was meant to stand off against a US carrier.

-Sik

Gunslinger · « **Reply #35 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:04:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy
I'm sorry. I misunderstood you when you asked if it was meant to stand off against a US carrier.

-Sik

I should have been more specific. What a meant was a carrier battle GROUP.

Sikboy · « **Reply #36 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:08:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
I should have been more specific. What a meant was a carrier battle GROUP.

Even so, I don't think that group v. group actions are very realistic either.

But what are we talking about here? I'm actually getting confused posting in both Chinese Carrier threads lol.

-Sik

Habu · « **Reply #37 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:10:44 PM »

Why make your own when you can always get a fully working one from ......

Quote

In late 1995, France is reported to have offerred the Clemenceau for free, provided that China bought radar and communications systems from French companies. Nothing came of the offer.

Nilsen · « **Reply #38 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:15:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Habu
Why make your own when you can always get a fully working one from ......

If i were China I would go for the French option. Proven design that works.

Sikboy · « **Reply #39 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:17:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Habu
Why make your own when you can always get a fully working one from ......

I imagine that the maintenance and operations costs of that Antique are probably prohibative, especially considering that I don't think they would be able to operate the Sukhoi's off of them. China does seem heavily invested in the Su-27, including license building them in country.

So the free carrier could conceivably cost a ton of money and not actually do what they want.

-Sik

Nilsen · « **Reply #40 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:27:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy
I imagine that the maintenance and operations costs of that Antique are probably prohibative, especially considering that I don't think they would be able to operate the Sukhoi's off of them. China does seem heavily invested in the Su-27, including license building them in country.

So the free carrier could conceivably cost a ton of money and not actually do what they want.

-Sik

Why cant they operate Su27's from them? They are not designed to work with them, but making that happen should not be that costly. When you see all the work they are doing on the russian ship, that cant be cheap either.

The spanish carriers they were offered could prolly not launch SU27's or that would prolly have been the cheapest option.

Sikboy · « **Reply #41 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:40:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
Why cant they operate Su27's from them? They are not designed to work with them, but making that happen should not be that costly. When you see all the work they are doing on the russian ship, that cant be cheap either.

The spanish carriers they were offered could prolly not launch SU27's or that would prolly have been the cheapest option.

That is a good point. I had actually forgotten about the French Carriers using Cats. I don't know how much of a technology swap it would be to get them going.

-Sik

Gunslinger · « **Reply #42 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:43:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy
Even so, I don't think that group v. group actions are very realistic either.

But what are we talking about here? I'm actually getting confused posting in both Chinese Carrier threads lol.

-Sik

to recapp,

My assumption was that an Air Craft that was not catapult assisted from a CV could not have much on board as far as Weapons, Special Avionics, and Fuel. They would be less combat effective than an F/A-18 hornet.

Then spitfire made the comment:

Quote

I'm sure the Chinese will buy/build the navalized Flanker in the future. As a pure fighter, that thing kicks F18s ass, especially the big heavy Super Hornets.

Wich to me is not applicable because modern day air combat tactics arent like Ace High in that a 1v1 fight probably wouldnt happen. Thus the chinese would be at a disadvantage tacticaly (mostly numbers here but also weapons as well) and logisticaly (lack of re-fueling)

If there's one thing our Nations military has is top notch carriers and naval air combat capability.

My whole assertion is that with out a catapult assisted launch any A/C would be at a HUGE disadvantage in combat againts an american CVN Battle Group.

Nilsen · « **Reply #43 on:** May 28, 2005, 03:46:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy
That is a good point. I had actually forgotten about the French Carriers using Cats. I don't know how much of a technology swap it would be to get them going.

-Sik

Im guessing that weapon storage, fuel transfer systems, spare parts and _maybe_ elevator sizes and stuff would have been some issues. Communication equipment would need to be compatible, but on the plus side they could prolly launch some sort of tankers and awacs system from it alot easyer than with the russian one.

Russian · « **Reply #44 on:** May 28, 2005, 04:13:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
to recapp,

My assumption was that an Air Craft that was not catapult assisted from a CV could not have much on board as far as Weapons, Special Avionics, and Fuel. They would be less combat effective than an F/A-18 hornet.

Russian designers didn’t implement catapult, not because they couldn’t, but because it’s so bloody troublesome to maintain it. If it would affect fighters so much that they cannot operate to full potential, I’m sure they would spend extra money on spies and get needed technology.

Btw – notice combat radius operation of aircraft discussed. Also special version of Su can refuel.