over the long run, I’m quite bullish on Brazil’s economic prospects too

over long run. it is aging population and non scientific base.

China made the evaluation in late 80s that they preferred Su-27 over Mig-29 due to its greater payload and range. When they were choosing between Su-27 and j-10 for building naval fighter jet, they picked Su-27 again for similar reasons.

that evaluation is 1980s. Greater payload you only need for real bombers like US is using B-1/B-2/B-52. J-10 has no chance of becoming Naval jet. its designed is too compromised. the only logical choice is buying MI-29K which has strike loads . Su-33 is already overweight. the level of weight reduction and engine power needed to make it multirole will make it very expensive.

We are still in the beginning stage of China figuring out the basics of carrier operation. But carrying 4 YJ-83 AShM for J-15 shouldn’t be a problem at all. We have pictures from 2013 showing J-15s carrying 2 YJ-83s and 2 PL-8s. We’ve seen J-15 carrying buddying refueling pod. Remember, they are still at very stages of practicing taking off and landing with payload. And we’ve seen possible designs from growler version from J-15. I’m too lazy to post all the photos, but huitong’s site have some of them. You can check it up.
http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/fighters-ii.html#J-15

As they spend more time training, they become more comfortable taking off and landing with greater payload. I’m not sure which pods on Su-34 you are referring to, but I can’t think of any pods for naval aviation missions that China hasn’t developed something similar to already.

In terms of air superiority, it’s pretty clear by now that flanker series has advantage given similar generation of electronics and missiles in BVR. Most countries are buying flankers rather than fulcrums for that reason. In terms of multirole capability, something with greater payload and range will generally be better for that purpose.

If you want to argue that Mig-29K is a better fit for Adm K class carrier, because you can have a larger airwing of it than Su-33, that’s legitimate argument. I don’t have the numbers, but it’s certainly possible that Mig-29K can take off with similar fuel/payload to Su-33 off the ski-jump. But if China is looking to develop a CATOBAR carrier to fully utilize flanker’s payload, I don’t see how Mig-29K can match that.

the problem is CATOBAR and China are decades away. so there is no point in putting 4th generation fighter. MIG-29K is already certified since 2009 on Adm K. China could have bought it off the shelf and do faster training and induction with full multirole capability. It is wasting years of time with no result. remember China demographic collapse is worse than Japan. and at most 10 years maximum so there is not much chance of spending money on most probably single CATOBAR training ship.

I think a good number of photos from this google search i did are from CV-16. Sorry too many photos to post
https://www.google.com/search?q=cv-16+interior+photos&biw=1280&bih=673&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=D06xVIT4AcLsgwSbpoLwBw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#tbm=isch&tbs=rimg%3ACURvjHm2ZX2KIjh7fXRJ8NOhX7i2Z-yAyoC_1ljV31hITGAarmnL2WFdtWDCg21-Q12Zto6cvDfi55O4LXiQp2EbSCCoSCXt9dEnw06FfEZvFRPNSOREVKhIJuLZn7IDKgL8R2c8ZWRE5xx4qEgmWNXfWEhMYBhF7EP31BpLFnioSCauacvZYV21YERpIZN7i80xmKhIJMKDbX5DXZm0RMf8JJmm7OPEqEgmjpy8N-Lnk7hH_1UM7dQjcoFioSCQteJCnYRtIIETH_1CSZpuzjx&q=dalian%20carrier%20interior%20photos&imgdii=_

It is never capable of round the world trip like Vik and Adm K.

There is no indication that Russia’s plans for a future carrier-based aircraft are any more advanced than China’s, and certainly her plans for future carriers are both more distant and subject to greater uncertainty. Liaoning herself is almost certainly in much better condition than Admiral Kuznetsov. When Kuz emerges from her refit she may well be superior to Liaoning in terms of equipment fit, but then China will be deep into construction of a second aircraft carrier at that point.

how is your prediction of Brazil as superpower coming along?
You have indication of China future carriers earlier than RuaN and carrier based aircraft more advanced?. J-20 on carrier has no future. there is no mastery of TVC tech by China. same old canards from 1980s.

Turning to aircraft, it is likely that PLANAFs J-15s are and will be superior both to Russia’s current EOL Su-33s, and to her future MiG-29Ks.

how is J-15 superior to MIG-29K?. MIG-29K can launch 4 300KM antiship missile. so it always have first shot on carriers in open seas. Su-33K likely have bigger RCS and likely overweight due to canards.

Despite JSR‘s protestations to the contrary, we know that Su-33 was selected as the superior platform back in the day,

Those are back in the days. nothing to do with tomorrow.

and that Russia’s decision to opt for MiG-29K this time around was driven by external considerations regarding economies of scale (with MiG-29K already having an active production line for the Indian Navy) and the state’s interest in propping up MiG.

economis of scale? have you looked at AL-31 production with RD-33. It is exceeding by 10 to 1. if Su-33 some version of was suitable they would have chosen it.

Indeed, recent images suggest that China is investigating a CATOBAR variant of J-15; if realised such an aircraft would not only represent a considerable development over Russia’s own Su-33, but would potentially offer capabilities superior to all existing naval fighters (in terms of range, payload, AAR role, Growler role). Of course the realisation of such potential would depend upon a variety of factors.

All are baseless speculations. Chinese built flankers haven’t shown that heavy pods like on Su-34.

IMHO rather quick introduction of MiG-29K is not equal. It was pretty much tested in 1990s; though not exactly same aircraft now, they at least know MiG-29K can operate from carriers. Current tests are more like follow-on, testing armaments avionics etc.

tested in 1990s. Is it a joke. show me MIG-29K with 5 wet stations tested in 1990s? or similar cockpit design/ 50% enhance fuel capacity. these things need design from ground up.

Radar detection range is twice even with slot array.

http://www.migavia.ru/index.php/en/production/new-unified-family-of-the-fighters/mig-29k-mig-29kub?limit=1&start=1
The fighter has multi-role, multi-mode “pulse-Doppler” type radar “Zhuk-ME” manufactured by “Fazotron-NIIP” Corporation. The radar is provided with the slot array. As compared with radars of the previous generation, “Zhuk-ME” has wider scanning angle in azimuth, twice longer target detection range, less weight and increased reliability. “Zhuk-ME” provides tracking up to 10 air targets with four targets simultaneous firing with missiles

.

To be perfectly honest it appears that the PLAN carrier is mirroring the footsteps of the Russian carrier, Kuznetsov as they attempt to operate fixed wing aircraft from the deck of the Liaoing. The speed of development seems to be the same.

They are not following Russian footsteps. otherwise they would be flying MIG-29K with strike loads from carriers. Vikramaditya is prime example that complex things can be done cheaply (consider slow pace of Indian money release and management) and faster in Russia.

70-100? Where is the funding going to come from for this? As it stands, the mooted force of 30 tankers would be the world’s largest behind the United States (although by the time it eventuates China will probably have as many or more).

Certainly the ability to mobilise forces and project power throughout the vast Russian landmass and near abroad (including Arctic) is of paramount importance, but (a) this must be achieved in the context of available funding and (b) aerial tankers make up only a small part of such measures.

100 tankers at some ruble price spread out over couple of years is not big money. Russia still is trade surplus country even if Oil price go to zero.

Iranian settlement will bring millions of barrels of Oil to market and drive down the price further.

http://sputniknews.com/russia/20141218/1015986532.html
And I do not understand why the final deal has not been inked yet. I hope it will happen in the near future,” Putin said at a press conference.

Ok lets say 120m… including ToT, training, facilities, initial spare parts etc. Check cost of other deals including 100% or so ToT…

It says $59m is less than half. so most probably price is higher than $120m. and these are fly prices.
static military budget also not helping either for future upgrades.

http://www.janes.com/article/44033/france-announces-flat-2015-defence-budget

I’m not sure where you get the idea that Belgium will be bankrupt. Providing The Netherlands goes through with an F-35 purchase as planned, I would expect Belgium to follow suit.

Netherland has barely 37 on order at very slow rate of induction and that order predates Ukraine crises that has led to fall of Euro by 15%.
If Oil stays low Arab investors will simply not have money to keep EU economy afloat. I can foresee further cost cutting in EU defence budgets.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/074c9d94-8604-11e4-b11b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3MtSUKPyz
European leaders balk at Kiev’s pleas to fill $15bn funding gap

Reading comprehension. What does the world “primarily” mean to you? Oil prices are most certainly the primary driver of the collapse of the Ruble.

Which continues BTW, further demonstrating the ridiculousness of your assertions yesterday.

you have no understanding of economics. if they care about currency they can easily cut output by wide margin and price will go up. or do you think only Saudis have computer technology of making cuts?. Predictions were spot on.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-25/pre-opec-producer-meeting-fails-to-deliver-crude-oil-output-cuts.html
There is an overproduction of oil,� Igor Sechin, Chief Executive of OAO Rosneft, Russia�s largest oil company, said after the meeting. �Supply is exceeding demand, but not critically� and Russia wouldn�t need to cut production immediately even if oil fell below $60 a barrel, he said.

http://rt.com/business/214747-ruble-central-bank-nabiullina/
We must learn to live in a new reality, to focus more on our own resources to finance projects and give import substitution a chance,� the bank chief said in a televised address Tuesday.

High Oil prices were not benefiting Russia due to capital outflow, EU vacations/real estate/ imports that. Lower oil prices will eliminate all those positives for EU.
same situation in Middleast where expensive oil was sold to India/China/Korea/Japan and money was recycled in Euros/Pounds.

Prolong low oil prices very good thing. let see how single commodity countries like Canada/Saudi/Australia/Norway/Brazil/Qatar can afford there import depended military, projects and social system.