Vikramaditya vs Liaoning

I suppose if the MoD has money to burn and see a modernized Su-33 and Su-33 AEW as worth the cash… maybe.

It would have been money well spent, given the stakes i.e. superior air defence for an entire CBG plus longer ranged strike against both naval and land targets.

Mig-29K production restart was, and remains the better choice for the IN compared to a modernized Su-33, mostly because their forthcoming carriers are just way too small to carry a significant number of flankers, whereas they’re just right to carry a regiment of Mig-29Ks.

How many Su-33’s do you reckon the Vikram can accommodate? Its about 5m longer than the MiG-29K, but has shorter folded wingspan.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222648[/ATTACH]

I see no reason for it to be less than 20, if not the full quota of 24.

And now the Russians are retiring their Su-33s… and replacing them with new-build MiG-29Ks… I wonder why? 😉

More cost effective. As the Mig-29K was already in production for India.

Not today certainly. But at the time of the then-Gorshkov negotiation, IIRC it was the MiG-29K that was defunct while the Su-33 was flying in service. I’m not totally convinced that it would have been prohibitively expensive to develop a Su-33MKI for an order of say 35-40 aircraft, using systems already fielded on the Su-30.

And now the Russians are retiring their Su-33s… and replacing them with new-build MiG-29Ks… I wonder why? 😉

Not today certainly. But at the time of the then-Gorshkov negotiation, IIRC it was the MiG-29K that was defunct while the Su-33 was flying in service. I’m not totally convinced that it would have been prohibitively expensive to develop a Su-33MKI for an order of say 35-40 aircraft, using systems already fielded on the Su-30.

Real estate is more limited on the Vik carriers but operated in slightly lower numbers the trade-off would still have been worth it given its exceptional persistence and long sensor range.

I suppose if the MoD has money to burn and see a modernized Su-33 and Su-33 AEW as worth the cash… maybe.

Mig-29K production restart was, and remains the better choice for the IN compared to a modernized Su-33, mostly because their forthcoming carriers are just way too small to carry a significant number of flankers, whereas they’re just right to carry a regiment of Mig-29Ks.

Why would purchasing the Su-33 prevent PLAN from integrating the YJ-12.

PLA has been… disinclined in past history to fork out extra money to allow russian production to modify their fighters for indigenous Chinese weapons (some places say Sukhoi didn’t want to, the situation remains murky). That is why Su-27SK, J-11A, Su-30MKK/MK2 in PLA service all carry exclusively Russian weapons, and that was one of the driving motivations why PLA sought to develop J-11B, and now J-16 and J-15.

I can’t imagine IN would be willing to fork out the cash to reopen the Su-33 production line to procure what would inevitably be only a small number of Su-33s… Not to mention the additional development costs for such a “AEW” Su-33. And that’s assuming IN is willing to forgo the already rare real estate on the relatively small vikramditya and vikrant, for what would be a less than optimal AEW solution (better than Ka-31 probably, but still hardly top quality).

Not today certainly. But at the time of the then-Gorshkov negotiation, IIRC it was the MiG-29K that was defunct while the Su-33 was flying in service. I’m not totally convinced that it would have been prohibitively expensive to develop a Su-33MKI for an order of say 35-40 aircraft, using systems already fielded on the Su-30.

Real estate is more limited on the Vik carriers but operated in slightly lower numbers the trade-off would still have been worth it given its exceptional persistence and long sensor range.

With regard to the Brahmos, given that the Su-30MKI can carry only one, any more would have been unfeasible for the Su-33. However, it could still have carried additional payload (including lighter anti-ship missiles) on other hard-points. Mix it up.

(I shudder to imagine if PLAN had purchased Su-33s from Russia, meaning the only supersonic AShM at their disposal would be the 4.5 ton moskit… eurgh)

Why would purchasing the Su-33 prevent PLAN from integrating the YJ-12.

I can’t imagine IN would be willing to fork out the cash to reopen the Su-33 production line to procure what would inevitably be only a small number of Su-33s… Not to mention the additional development costs for such a “AEW” Su-33. And that’s assuming IN is willing to forgo the already rare real estate on the relatively small vikramditya and vikrant, for what would be a less than optimal AEW solution (better than Ka-31 probably, but still hardly top quality).
IN is better off asking Northrop Grumman for an STOBAR solution for E-2D.

An Su-33 equipped with brahmos would be formidable. However I don’t think Brahmos is very suitable for air launch, mainly due to its ungainly weight. 2.5 tons for an AShM means even the largest of fighters such as flankers, can only end up carrying one, maybe two at a stretch. For surface and submarine launch, you can make a missile as heavy as you want. But for air launch, and especially from aircraft carriers, a lighter missile is more desirable.

In that sense I will be curious as to whether J-15 will be equipped with the YJ-12, a similar supersonic missile with similar performance parameters to Brahmos, but with a lighter warhead and an overall lower mass at an estimated 1.5 tons. Even from an aircraft carrier, a flanker should be able to carry two YJ-12s with generous space aside for AAMs.
(I shudder to imagine if PLAN had purchased Su-33s from Russia, meaning the only supersonic AShM at their disposal would be the 4.5 ton moskit… eurgh)

That’s a question worth addressing.

Good points throughout. Even crew proficiency is not a perennial issue. The PLAN will learn whatever it needs to, by trial-and-error if need be. Ten years from now, there are unlikely to be any particular proficiency concerns and the next carrier should be operationalized much quicker.

A Bars equipped twin-seat Su-33 derivative would certainly have been a more potent option (even in smaller numbers) for the Indian Navy (while also conferring a high degree of commonality with the bulk of the IAF fleet). Could perhaps even have been modified to carry the Brahmos. It would be worth reading the analyses of IN officers involved in the Vik acquisition.

Liaoning.
bigger ship, more crap it can carry.. nuff said.

I also expect the PLAN to plan a good carrier fleet to go with the Liaoning.
Eventually the PLAN will also plan to field a stealth fighter thats in the PLANning stages.

IN has more carrier experiences for sure and I think the MiG-29K looks better than the Su-33 variant China is illegally producing
but at the end of the day the Liaoning has far more potential and flexibility than the Vikky.

But clearly the original SU-33 is much more better looking than J-15 becaus their physical differences are just so great… :dev2:

Liaoning.
bigger ship, more crap it can carry.. nuff said.

I also expect the PLAN to plan a good carrier fleet to go with the Liaoning.
Eventually the PLAN will also plan to field a stealth fighter thats in the PLANning stages.

IN has more carrier experiences for sure and I think the MiG-29K looks better than the Su-33 variant China is illegally producing
but at the end of the day the Liaoning has far more potential and flexibility than the Vikky.

Indian Mig29KUBs have better workload distribution with that second set of eyes in that rear cockpit

The benefits of a second seat aren’t to be dismissed, indeed, but in this day and age of high cockpit automation I wonder if a second seat is as necessary for the majority of tasks a plane will encounter. Certainly I don’t think either Mig-29K or Su-33/J-15 are expected to perform strike missions as heavily laden as F-15E or Su-34, Su-30MKK etc. I think I’d rather simply have a larger aircraft rather than add another seat in my medium weight aircraft.
In any case, J-15S (twin seater) exists as well.

India has purchased several of these for their AEW needs

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222640[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222641[/ATTACH]

Actually, both China and India have.

China’s also developing the Z-8AEW. No one’s quite sure how far in development it is, but it’s been ongoing a few years now.

In terms of power projection, and aside from range and payload capacity, what you want are avionics to support precision strike, anti shipping, and stand off precision strike. We know Mig-29K will have the apparatus to support all that. J-15 almost definitely will as well.

Indian Mig29KUBs have better workload distribution with that second set of eyes in that rear cockpit

which of these ships will have a AEW platform of any kind

India has purchased several of these for their AEW needs

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222640[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222641[/ATTACH]

which of these ships will have a AEW platform of any kind

You’re probably good simply using Su-33 figures for MTOW and range. If anything the airframe’s weight should be somewhat lower than the original Su-33, given modern manufacturing techniques and miniaturization of avionics. The first batch are using Al-31s too, onwards they expect WS-10A, whose thrust is virtually equivalent to Al-31Fs aboard your vanilla Su-33s. (I think there’s a difference of 3 KN or something but for all intents and purposes they’re considered equal. There are mutterings that J-15 may end up carrying an uprated WS-10, but that’s not here nor there just yet)

No one knows what kind of avionics J-15 boast, but we can logicallly deduce it should at least have the A2A capability of J-11B, and both official media and pictures of the aircraft with dummies show it will be intended to have an anti shipping, sead (via YJ-91/Kh-31) and precision land attack capability.
The only other notable caveat are the rumours that J-15 will be armed with an AESA, but that’s died down recently to suggest a later J-15 variant will instead be armed with the AESA.

In terms of power projection, and aside from range and payload capacity, what you want are avionics to support precision strike, anti shipping, and stand off precision strike. We know Mig-29K will have the apparatus to support all that. J-15 almost definitely will as well.

Well, in the end it’s likely a very even match with the Liaoning/J-15 having a slight edge. (IMO) Of course so many other factors to also consider besides just the Carriers/Airwings.

Very good points and I am leaning towards the Liaoning/J-15 myself. Of course I would still like to know more about the capabilities of the J-15? Especially MTOW, Range, and Avionics.

You’re probably good simply using Su-33 figures for MTOW and range. If anything the airframe’s weight should be somewhat lower than the original Su-33, given modern manufacturing techniques and miniaturization of avionics. The first batch are using Al-31s too, onwards they expect WS-10A, whose thrust is virtually equivalent to Al-31Fs aboard your vanilla Su-33s. (I think there’s a difference of 3 KN or something but for all intents and purposes they’re considered equal. There are mutterings that J-15 may end up carrying an uprated WS-10, but that’s not here nor there just yet)

No one knows what kind of avionics J-15 boast, but we can logicallly deduce it should at least have the A2A capability of J-11B, and both official media and pictures of the aircraft with dummies show it will be intended to have an anti shipping, sead (via YJ-91/Kh-31) and precision land attack capability.
The only other notable caveat are the rumours that J-15 will be armed with an AESA, but that’s died down recently to suggest a later J-15 variant will instead be armed with the AESA.

In terms of power projection, and aside from range and payload capacity, what you want are avionics to support precision strike, anti shipping, and stand off precision strike. We know Mig-29K will have the apparatus to support all that. J-15 almost definitely will as well.

That’s a question worth addressing.

Not including crew proficiency, how would a Kuznetsov/Liaoning equipped with 24 Su-33s/J-15s compare with Vikramditya equipped with 24 Mig-29Ks in terms of sortie rate, but more importantly, aircraft take off weight (which naturally translates into range and payload)? Assume that the Migs and flankers hold equally modern avionics (that is to say, all parties can fire precision A2G munitions, have BVR, etc — the only difference is the physical aircraft and their engines)

I’ve heard it been stated that Mig-29K is supposedly a better carrier STOBAR fighter because of its lower weight compared to the naval flanker, but at the same time, Mig-29K would also have a proportionally lower thrust with its pair of RD-33s rather than Al-31s/WS-10s, meaning it doesn’t magically have the ability to carry more payload for its size and thrust. If anything there should be a relatively linear relationship between engine thrust and MTOW (and thus payload, fuel load, etc).

So the question of Mig-29K vs Su-33/J-15 is really a matter of each aircraft’s ski jump MTOW. Assuming that both types of aircraft can take off with full or near full MTOW under operational headwind, one would have to give an advantage to the naval flanker, imho, simply because it is indeed a larger fighter able to carry more and fly further. Mig-29K does have the benefit of hauling external fuel tanks, but that will cut into its external payload weight, limiting munitions. There is buddy air fuelling for Mig-29K — but for argument’s sake let’s consider that J-15 will adopt this as well. It is not a capability limited by airframe, as opposed to say, MTOW.
So then the question orients towards that age old conundrum of comparing heavy weight fighters versus lighter fighters. F-18E/F (or indeed, F-14!) versus F-18. F-15 versus F-16. Su-27 vs Mig-29. Is the long range and superior payload of a larger fighter achieved at greater financial cost or perhaps greater maintenance times and lower sortie rates?
More important for aircraft carriers, is whether a ship would be better served hauling X number of Su-33s, or 1.2X numbers of Mig-29Ks in its place?

Of course for a Vikram versus Liaoning comparison the last point won’t come into play, as both ships will probably only carry 24 Mig-29Ks (or LCA) and J-15s in their lifetimes, respectively.

Very good points and I am leaning towards the Liaoning/J-15 myself. Of course I would still like to know more about the capabilities of the J-15? Especially MTOW, Range, and Avionics.

As carriers rendered battleship fights unlikely, so have modern submarines rendered carrier fights implausible. More relevant is which ship will function better for power-projection vs lower-tier advasaries. With the Mig-29K, I’d say the advantage goes to India in that regard since it makes better use of the STOBAR configuration than China’s Flanker-knockoff. The Indians also have more institutional depth in naval-aviation.

Well, the J-15 is likely to have a range advantage over the Mig-29K. Which, is very useful indeed. Honestly, I need to know more about the true capabilities of the former. (i.e. J-15) Before I could make judgment.

That said discussion on this matter may be irrelevant as China’s already working on an all-up CATOBAR ship (no word on what they’ll fly off of it).

Yet, India just launched the Vikrant and is said to be also planning a CATOBAR Carrier.

FLY NAVY:cool:

As carriers rendered battleship fights unlikely, so have modern submarines rendered carrier fights implausible. More relevant is which ship will function better for power-projection vs lower-tier advasaries. With the Mig-29K, I’d say the advantage goes to India in that regard since it makes better use of the STOBAR configuration than China’s Flanker-knockoff. The Indians also have more institutional depth in naval-aviation.

That’s a question worth addressing.

Not including crew proficiency, how would a Kuznetsov/Liaoning equipped with 24 Su-33s/J-15s compare with Vikramditya equipped with 24 Mig-29Ks in terms of sortie rate, but more importantly, aircraft take off weight (which naturally translates into range and payload)? Assume that the Migs and flankers hold equally modern avionics (that is to say, all parties can fire precision A2G munitions, have BVR, etc — the only difference is the physical aircraft and their engines)

I’ve heard it been stated that Mig-29K is supposedly a better carrier STOBAR fighter because of its lower weight compared to the naval flanker, but at the same time, Mig-29K would also have a proportionally lower thrust with its pair of RD-33s rather than Al-31s/WS-10s, meaning it doesn’t magically have the ability to carry more payload for its size and thrust. If anything there should be a relatively linear relationship between engine thrust and MTOW (and thus payload, fuel load, etc).

So the question of Mig-29K vs Su-33/J-15 is really a matter of each aircraft’s ski jump MTOW. Assuming that both types of aircraft can take off with full or near full MTOW under operational headwind, one would have to give an advantage to the naval flanker, imho, simply because it is indeed a larger fighter able to carry more and fly further. Mig-29K does have the benefit of hauling external fuel tanks, but that will cut into its external payload weight, limiting munitions. There is buddy air fuelling for Mig-29K — but for argument’s sake let’s consider that J-15 will adopt this as well. It is not a capability limited by airframe, as opposed to say, MTOW.
So then the question orients towards that age old conundrum of comparing heavy weight fighters versus lighter fighters. F-18E/F (or indeed, F-14!) versus F-18. F-15 versus F-16. Su-27 vs Mig-29. Is the long range and superior payload of a larger fighter achieved at greater financial cost or perhaps greater maintenance times and lower sortie rates?
More important for aircraft carriers, is whether a ship would be better served hauling X number of Su-33s, or 1.2X numbers of Mig-29Ks in its place?

Of course for a Vikram versus Liaoning comparison the last point won’t come into play, as both ships will probably only carry 24 Mig-29Ks (or LCA) and J-15s in their lifetimes, respectively.

Considering both Aircraft Carriers are of Russian Origin and similar is Overall Design. Complete with Russian Fighters Mig-29K and J-15. (copy of Su-33) Which, has the better odds of winning any future confrontation???:confused:

As carriers rendered battleship fights unlikely, so have modern submarines rendered carrier fights implausible. More relevant is which ship will function better for power-projection vs lower-tier advasaries. With the Mig-29K, I’d say the advantage goes to India in that regard since it makes better use of the STOBAR configuration than China’s Flanker-knockoff. The Indians also have more institutional depth in naval-aviation.

That said discussion on this matter may be irrelevant as China’s already working on an all-up CATOBAR ship (no word on what they’ll fly off of it).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]222629[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]222630[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]222631[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]222632[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]222633[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]222634[/ATTACH]