Russia helps China build new aircraft carrier

[shag]

The current MiG-29K is different from the original MiG-29K. The current MiG-29K is derived from the second-generation Fulcrum, the MiG-29M. There are two generations of fulcrums: MiG-29B upgrades and MiG-29M upgrades. The MiG-29K and MiG-35 are derived from the MiG-29M. The old MiG-29K, and the MiG-29SMT is derived from the MiG-29B. There are airframe differences, in addition to avionics and radar. The Su-33 was the contemporary of the old MiG-29K, and if it's production were to be restarted we should expect a modernization package for it before it sees any export orders. Possibly the Su-30MK2 or MKK avionics.

wow you are definetly well read on this. Its true the IN mig29k is different from the original k. Su-33 china inducts will also probably be upgraded to MKK or MK2 avionics standard. Lets watch what what they do to their su-33s when they buy it.
here is a link to indian navy's mig29k specs.

[link]http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/MiG-29K.html[/link]

anyone got any reliable source for chinese Su-33 plans?

 

[tphuang]

Tiger1974, you liberally throw around the word stealth. I'm assuming you mean RCS reduction techniques. How effective would those be on a warship with several thousand tons for a displacement? Especially given other surveillance means... You also asses the developmental stages of top secret projects. To be able to tell whether Russian and Chinese 5th-generation fighter projects are at a comparable readyness level you would need to have insider information on both. Do you claim to have this info? Or are you pulling this out of thin air?

We do welcome new members, and discussion. However please realize that claims need support. You've made many claims but provided little support or elaboration.

Tphuang do you think China will be willing to purchase what has been stated as the minimal requirement of 24 aircraft?

It's really hard to say. I think they might be willing to wait until domestic flankers are more ready. We haven't seen any photo of a naval flanker undergoing flight tests yet, but I think that will come in the next year. Until then, the pilots in the flight school will first work with take off and landing with Su-30MK2s, try out the carrier training center NITKA in Ukraine and also they've signed an agreement to train on the Sao Paulo Carrier. Which, basically confirms that they are going with catapult on their first domestic carrier.

 

[Feanor]

If they are waiting on domestic Flankers then KnAAPO Su-33s are out of the question. It would take 2-3 years to complete modernization, and start production. It would be 2011-12 by the time deliveries could realistically begin. If the Chinese program is 1-2 years from IOC then the deal wouldn't be on the table at all.

 

[tphuang]

If they are waiting on domestic Flankers then KnAAPO Su-33s are out of the question. It would take 2-3 years to complete modernization, and start production. It would be 2011-12 by the time deliveries could realistically begin. If the Chinese program is 1-2 years from IOC then the deal wouldn't be on the table at all.

They are definitely further than 1-2 year from IOC. Their main reason to get knaapo su-33s is due to the urgency of naval training program + lack of certainty in the domestic program. I think that if they do get some Su-33, it would be the most risk-free and ready version possible, because they really just want to get some naval fighters to train with to start off. That would give the domestic version more time to mature. But it's definitely not within their plans to buy a lot of Knaapo Su-33s. I think 24 might be more than what China is willing to buy. That's just my opinion.

 

[SkolZkiy]

and for Russia lesser then 24 is needlessly. that's the key

 

[Feanor]

So it looks like the deal won't happen afterall. There are no refurbished aircraft to offer. The production line is closed and won't re-open for less then 24. How far away would you estimate IOC to be?

 

[Tiger1974]

Regarding information about Chinese stealth technology

Tiger1974, you liberally throw around the word stealth. I'm assuming you mean RCS reduction techniques. How effective would those be on a warship with several thousand tons for a displacement? Especially given other surveillance means... You also asses the developmental stages of top secret projects. To be able to tell whether Russian and Chinese 5th-generation fighter projects are at a comparable readyness level you would need to have insider information on both. Do you claim to have this info? Or are you pulling this out of thin air?

The information is on many websites, one of the most well known experts on the subject matter is Dr. Fisher (expert on PLA whose papers often appear on the "International Strategy & Assessment Center" whose website is "www.strategycenter.net"). I was just giving the individual who I replied to an idea or snapshot of what the US Department of Defense is publishing as well as what the main websites regarding such things are publishing.

Concerning the stealth fighters I was talking about the Shenyang and Chengdu projects of J-13, J-14, Super J-10, & J-XX. There is debate as to whither they are 2-4 separate projects, the types of 5th generation fighters, & the stage of development. All internet sources point to those projects being ahead of India's MCA (in comparison if you look up the Medium Combat Aircraft). Regarding the "stealth" warships, you are correct I was speaking about RCS (reduced cross section), "stealth" is one of the terms used in speaking about these ships saying that they have "stealth" features or design (though in reality they are NOT as stealthy as even the relatively low-tech stealth F-117).

Links:

International Strategy & Assessment Center = International Assessment and Strategy Center
Jamestown Foundation =
The Jamestown Foundation - The Jamestown Foundation
Sino Defense =
SinoDefence.com - The Chinese Military in the 21st Century
China-Defense-Mashup=
China-Defense-Mashup|China Military News, images and videos information
US Department of Defense=
U.S. Department of Defense Official Website - 12/08/2005 - Final Edition
Air Power Australia
Air Power Australia - Home Page

I find the above websites to provide extensive and detailed information, though one need to of course recongize the sources and take that into consideration. US military, national security block in US foreign policy (the US must be number #1 at all costs, see "International Strategy & Assessment Center), Chinese nationalists with ties to the PLA? (china-defense-mashup), an anti-China? Australian neo-con think tank (Air Power Australia), etc.

Of course their is also the British defense publication "Janes" if you are willing to pay big bucks for an online subscription.

Sorry I did not take more time to post each link or multiple links for each example (such as the J-10), time constraints but all the above information is easily retrieved. For example if one types HQ-9 & missile you will get dozens of hits, if you type J-14 + stealth you will likewise get hits. From my review of the Internet, one can conclude one of two things either China has far more projects going on than China and in further development or somehow India which is a more open society has been able to keep its comparative projects in greater secrecy than in authoritarian China.

We do welcome new members, and discussion. However please realize that claims need support. You've made many claims but provided little support or elaboration.

Admin: Tiger, please make the effort to use the proper quote and edit tools, as it can make things look messy

 

[Salty Dog]

So it looks like the deal won't happen afterall. There are no refurbished aircraft to offer. The production line is closed and won't re-open for less then 24. How far away would you estimate IOC to be?

Despite previous discussion, I still feel if China really wants the Su-33, they will acquire it by some means. That's my opinion.

By the way, the Su-33 and Mig-29K are listed in the ROSOBORONEXPORT Catalogue of Aerospace Systems.

 

[HKSDU]

Despite previous discussion, I still feel if China really wants the Su-33, they will acquire it by some means. That's my opinion.

By the way, the Su-33 and Mig-29K are listed in the ROSOBORONEXPORT Catalogue of Aerospace Systems.

Hmm if China really wanted the Su-33 they mostly need the airfame with the engines and thats about all. Airframe, as in strengthened undercarriage, arrestor hooks, folding wings, redesigned landing wheels. But highly doubt Russia will sell Su-33 airframe with engines and let China install their own weapon suites and avionics. Just a personal perspective, I think China prefers Flankers over Migs. They chose Flankers over Migs during the 90's when both fighters where on the offering table, yet they chose the Flankers for range and payload. I feel that the same still applies on carrier fighter candidates. Even though its PLAN not PLAAF, they still prefer Flankers for the same reasons the PLAAF did.
Not objecting to your opinion, just my thoughts.

 

[Feanor]

Despite previous discussion, I still feel if China really wants the Su-33, they will acquire it by some means. That's my opinion.

By the way, the Su-33 and Mig-29K are listed in the ROSOBORONEXPORT Catalogue of Aerospace Systems.

Of course they're both listed. It doesn't mean that it's easy to buy them.

Tiger you list both Jamestown and APA on your list. I'm again questionable of your sources. I don't see in any of them, any concrete information which would tell us how far along any Chinese 5th generation aircraft projects are. Once again I'm asking you for a specific single source that tells us how far along the projects are. Otherwise we can not make any solid claims in that regard.

 

[tphuang]

So it looks like the deal won't happen afterall. There are no refurbished aircraft to offer. The production line is closed and won't re-open for less then 24. How far away would you estimate IOC to be?

Let me first define IOC in this case as the time when PLAN is ready to train its naval pilots on it rather than IOC on a carrier (which would be much later).

Based on previous programs like J-11B, I think a naval flanker program would take around 3 years to go from first flight to IOC. If my previous deciphering of AVIC1 news is correct, then naval flanker prototype should already be assembled, it's just waiting to test fly now. Mind you, J-11BS was assembled by end of 2007, but we didn't see a photo of it from CFTE until earlier this year. So, I think first flight will either happen this year or early next year. That would probably put IOC at the end of 2012. Which is a reasonable time if they want to launch the carrier by 2015. The problem that I have is the production capability of SAC. Even after 2 years a production, I don't think they've managed to even produce 1 regiment (around 28) of J-11B. Even if they manage to raise the production rate to 2 flankers a month by 2012, that would still only be 24 aircraft a year. And that would have to be split between the navy and the air force (who wants J-11BS). If they want to put 35 fighter jets on each of the domestic carriers, it would take them 3 years to produce one air wing.

This is exactly why PLAAF could never improve as fast as PLAN.

 

[Feanor]

Could purchasing Russian Flankers make up for part of the numbers, given how slow production is?

 

[shag]

tphuang,
What are the arguments for and against SU-33s and navalized flankers as of now in a comparison between the two?

I don't think we can as of yet decide if they will go for CATOBAR or STOBAR as of now (Preparation of varyag indicates a STOBAR and excecising on Sao Paulo as some one mentioned indicated a Catapult launcher.) Whats your opinion on this?
Do note that as of now most experts I talked to are of opinion Su33 doesn't support catapult operation(under carriage stresses etc.)

 

[shag]

It's really hard to say. I think they might be willing to wait until domestic flankers are more ready. We haven't seen any photo of a naval flanker undergoing flight tests yet, but I think that will come in the next year. Until then, the pilots in the flight school will first work with take off and landing with Su-30MK2s, try out the carrier training center NITKA in Ukraine and also they've signed an agreement to train on the Sao Paulo Carrier. Which, basically confirms that they are going with catapult on their first domestic carrier.

wait a minit!
I don't think the Su30MK2 has strengthened undercarriage etc. to take off using a ski jump or catapult!! please correct me if I am missing something here.
Arrested recovery is out of question for obvious reasons. What sort of training do u believe they will get out of a non naval platform?

 

[Feanor]

Well they can always get general flight training.

 

[Salty Dog]

I don't think we can as of yet decide if they will go for CATOBAR or STOBAR as of now (Preparation of varyag indicates a STOBAR and excecising on Sao Paulo as some one mentioned indicated a Catapult launcher.)

The Su-33 is way heavier than a Rafale or Super Hornet both of which were weight limited to operate from the ex-Foch (São Paulo).

 

[tphuang]

Could purchasing Russian Flankers make up for part of the numbers, given how slow production is?

That is definitely possible. Another possible reasons to buy from Russia is if the domestic production of WS-10A remains slow in the future. Maybe SAC production capability will improve in 5 years, I don't know.

tphuang,
What are the arguments for and against SU-33s and navalized flankers as of now in a comparison between the two?

I don't think we can as of yet decide if they will go for CATOBAR or STOBAR as of now (Preparation of varyag indicates a STOBAR and excecising on Sao Paulo as some one mentioned indicated a Catapult launcher.) Whats your opinion on this?
Do note that as of now most experts I talked to are of opinion Su33 doesn't support catapult operation(under carriage stresses etc.)

I wrote all the reasons for a domestic flanker in a previous post. Su-33s advantage is the availability.

I'd think CATOBAR is most likely given the recent Sao Paolo deal. In the long run, China is likely to go for CATOBAR.

 

[Salty Dog]

That is definitely possible. Another possible reasons to buy from Russia is if the domestic production of WS-10A remains slow in the future. Maybe SAC production capability will improve in 5 years, I don't know.

I wrote all the reasons for a domestic flanker in a previous post. Su-33s advantage is the availability.

I'd think CATOBAR is most likely given the recent Sao Paolo deal. In the long run, China is likely to go for CATOBAR.

Brazil and France rely heavily on the US Navy not only for technical assistance for CATOBAR systems, but also for final carrier qualifications for their pilots. It would be interesting to see where the PLAN would receive similar CATOBAR support.

 

[Feanor]

They would have to develop it indigenously. There have been indications that the current Russian carrier program is CATOBAR. But it's a long ways off. They may have to develop it indigenously.

 

[Spacearrow99]

They would have to develop it indigenously. There have been indications that the current Russian carrier program is CATOBAR. But it's a long ways off. They may have to develop it indigenously.

Here's a Russian article about carrier program.

Russia to build nuclear-powered 60,000-ton aircraft carrier | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire

Russia to build nuclear-powered 60,000-ton aircraft carrier

19:0227/02/2009
MOSCOW, February 27 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's new-generation aircraft carrier will be nuclear powered and have a displacement of up to 60,000 metric tons, a United Shipbuilding Corporation executive said on Friday.
Vice Adm. Anatoly Shlemov, the company's head of defense contracts, said the new carrier was still at the drawing board stage, but its blueprint and basic specifications have already been defined.

He said the carrier will serve as a seaborne platform for new-generation fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, in particular, a fifth-generation fighter that will replace the Su-33 multirole fighter aircraft currently in service, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).

"It will be a fifth-generation aircraft with classic horizontal take-off and landing capability," the admiral said.

Shlemov said, unlike in the past, the new aircraft carrier would not be armed with cruise missiles, which were not part of its "job description."

He said that at least three such carriers were to be built, for the Northern and Pacific Fleets.

The executive offered no timeline on the project, saying it was not as yet clear which shipyard would get the contract.

The new carrier has an estimated price tag of $4 billion.

So far the Russian Navy only has one aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov Project 1143.5, built in 1985, with a displacement of 55,000 metric tons, a crew of 1,500, and capability to carry more than 50 aircraft.