Hell, its been talked about on various web forums for months if not years...Do you really think that the world's militaries and intelligence services were somehow surprised? Are you really that naive? Really???
I think various political military decision makers are perhaps 'surprised', as it might not fit within their planning and/or assessments of capabilities vis-a-vis changing balance of power.
But anyone truly observing developments would of course anticipate for years now the inevitable test and operation of J-15 among other platforms.
It must be kept in mind that ski jump carriers can launch very limited aircraft. For example, the Su-33 cannot take off with a full fuel load. Also, Kuznetsov-class carriers are not exactly small by displacement, yet carry only 24 Su-33 jets which are load-limited as above.
Unlike the Soviets, who, AFAIK, had concerns about steam catapult operations in the Arctic, when the Chinese start fielding aircraft carriers with catapults, it'll be another matter entirely. Or maybe not. Given how SSNs are the true capital ships of modern navies.
Hey, So - do you know whether the CV JSF (F-35C) will be able to take off with full internal weapons and full fuel load, since it's basic empty weight is around 45,000lb?
Years of flying aircraft off carriers: USA - 100 China - 0
Number of Aircraft Carriers: USA - 11 nuclear powered supercarriers China - 1 ex-Soviet junk
I'm so scared. Maybe in 100 years, China will get to where the USA is today. That is if it doesn't collapse first. With the F-35B, even the Wasps will be able to carry a more potent fighter complement than the Varyag/shilang/laioning. So it's closer to 20 carriers vs 1.
The last pos under CHINA STRONG is a perfect example of the type of thinking (or should that read 'non-thinking') that has led to just so flawed programs like the JSF.
Air Power Australia says it best when they refer to such non-thinking people as "driving along, looking in the rear vision mirror".
Hey, So - do you know whether the CV JSF (F-35C) will be able to take off with full internal weapons and full fuel load, since it's basic empty weight is around 45,000lb?
That would make it as heavy as a Tomcat. The answer is catapult.
Mr China Strong. Perhaps you should look at some researched and well presented thoughts. If you have any thoughts of your own after reading,please feel free to share. http://www.strategycenter.net/docLib/20121125_FisherLessisNotEnough112512.pdf
This worries me. Ski jump jet operations are limiting, but this is the first step for them. They have money, ambition, and will. The know how will come in time along with capability.
Meanwhile, America will park our carriers for lack of funding little by little. China will learn to build carriers of increasing capability little by little. A few generations hence, at the current rate, naval air power will shift tremendously and it won't be our little pond anymore.
If this doesn't cause a visceral reaction you're not paying attention.
I think that you will find that the Chinese Navy is more advanced than reported. If I am correcrt, didn't the Brazilian Navy start traing Chinese pilots on their carrier from about 2010?
There is no doubt that the X-47B and the Super Hornet are integral and important parts of the US Navy's TACAIR recap program.
You just have to read the fine works of Robert Work to see that.
However, it is still just a UCAS and, as such, will not be able to provide such things as CAP over the CBG which is already limited by the likes of the Super Hornet.
21 comments:
Yet another 'Capability Surprise' for our friends on Russell Hill and the Pentagon - not to mention their fans on the WWW.
Anyone willing to wager the next 'Capability Surprise' will be disclosed around 31 January 2013?
How exactly is this a capability surprise??? It has been known to be coming for quite some time.
By whom?
Hell, its been talked about on various web forums for months if not years...Do you really think that the world's militaries and intelligence services were somehow surprised? Are you really that naive? Really???
I think various political military decision makers are perhaps 'surprised', as it might not fit within their planning and/or assessments of capabilities vis-a-vis changing balance of power.
But anyone truly observing developments would of course anticipate for years now the inevitable test and operation of J-15 among other platforms.
Getting ready to shred some hornets!
The scores, so far -
Anonymous - Correct (4)
Anonymous off with the fairies (2)
I think the Anonymis have it!
It must be kept in mind that ski jump carriers can launch very limited aircraft. For example, the Su-33 cannot take off with a full fuel load. Also, Kuznetsov-class carriers are not exactly small by displacement, yet carry only 24 Su-33 jets which are load-limited as above.
Unlike the Soviets, who, AFAIK, had concerns about steam catapult operations in the Arctic, when the Chinese start fielding aircraft carriers with catapults, it'll be another matter entirely. Or maybe not. Given how SSNs are the true capital ships of modern navies.
Hey, So - do you know whether the CV JSF (F-35C) will be able to take off with full internal weapons and full fuel load, since it's basic empty weight is around 45,000lb?
Gees SO, I wonder how the British made do with the same technolgy?repl 7171
I wonder how the British made do with the same technolgy?
Uh...Harriers?
*yawn*
Years of flying aircraft off carriers:
USA - 100
China - 0
Number of Aircraft Carriers:
USA - 11 nuclear powered supercarriers
China - 1 ex-Soviet junk
I'm so scared. Maybe in 100 years, China will get to where the USA is today. That is if it doesn't collapse first. With the F-35B, even the Wasps will be able to carry a more potent fighter complement than the Varyag/shilang/laioning. So it's closer to 20 carriers vs 1.
The last pos under CHINA STRONG is a perfect example of the type of thinking (or should that read 'non-thinking') that has led to just so flawed programs like the JSF.
Air Power Australia says it best when they refer to such non-thinking people as "driving along, looking in the rear vision mirror".
Hey, So - do you know whether the CV JSF (F-35C) will be able to take off with full internal weapons and full fuel load, since it's basic empty weight is around 45,000lb?
That would make it as heavy as a Tomcat. The answer is catapult.
Mr China Strong.
Perhaps you should look at some researched and well presented thoughts.
If you have any thoughts of your own after reading,please feel free to share.
http://www.strategycenter.net/docLib/20121125_FisherLessisNotEnough112512.pdf
This worries me. Ski jump jet operations are limiting, but this is the first step for them. They have money, ambition, and will. The know how will come in time along with capability.
Meanwhile, America will park our carriers for lack of funding little by little. China will learn to build carriers of increasing capability little by little. A few generations hence, at the current rate, naval air power will shift tremendously and it won't be our little pond anymore.
If this doesn't cause a visceral reaction you're not paying attention.
To China Strong/Magoo
*yawn*
Andrew, if you want to avoid muddy stains, as you claim, then you have to stop posting clap trap.
Being one of your little signatures, the *yawn* gave you away.
I think that you will find that the Chinese Navy is more advanced than reported.
If I am correcrt, didn't the Brazilian Navy start traing Chinese pilots on their carrier from about 2010?
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/11/us-navy-completes-first-shore-.html
To CHINA STRONG -
So, Andrew, what's your point?
There is no doubt that the X-47B and the Super Hornet are integral and important parts of the US Navy's TACAIR recap program.
You just have to read the fine works of Robert Work to see that.
However, it is still just a UCAS and, as such, will not be able to provide such things as CAP over the CBG which is already limited by the likes of the Super Hornet.
Thus the need for the strategy known as ASB.
Oh, Magoo, you have done it again!!!
How's that stain removal thingy goin'?
Given up, have we?
Post a Comment