It is rather wishful thinking that a nation that can design and building an Universal Vertical Launch System and then equip dozens of ships with it is somehow deficient in missiles
Yes, deficient missiles, we all know china is unable to match Brahmos, even most of the western nations don't have any comparable systems as Brahmos.It is rather wishful thinking that a nation that can design and building an Universal Vertical Launch System and then equip dozens of ships with it is somehow deficient in missiles
Type 52 has shitty attack and defense system. Its missile defense can not stop a missile like brahmos.
Don't write specification of those shitty radars. They are of 80 and 90 era capability and absolutely no match to MFSTAR. These poor radars can not track brahmos 80 km away so no question of stopping it. When they will spot Brahmos, it would have been all over. They can stop Brahmos by letting it collide with Type 52D.This is such a fanboy comment. Do you even know anything about the missiles in that video?
Don't Kolkata and Visakapatnam class destroyers have rotating arrays? Namely the Thales Volume search radar at roughly the same position as the volume search array on the 052D?
HHQ9 is a LONG RANGE SAM. Not a medium range sam like the Israeli missiles on Kolkata and Visakapatnam. It outranges barak 8 significantly, meaning it can intercept Brahmos and other high flying missiles during their cruise phases BEFORE they go into their low altitude terminal phases (circa 50km from target).
The "rotating radar" you're mocking is an OTH long range detection VHF enabling detection of low rcs contacts beyond the horizon for cueing of the massive starring AESA arrays on the 052D. Arrays that by the way have many more T/R modules than the much smaller arrays on Kolkata and Visakapatnam.
Even 1 v 1, the 052D is the better AAW platform considering that both P15A and P15B only have 32 MEDIUM RANGE SAM's.
Mach 3 terminal. Subsonic prior to that. However, those Mach 3 is also doubtfull at sea level.YJ-18 on the Chinese UVLS for 052D and 055 is Mach 3 terminal.
View attachment 101432
Also multiple other missile types to deal with threats from submarines and long, medium and short ranges for multi-layered air defense
China designed the world's largest VLS cells and has placed this system in 25 destroyers and 8 cruisers (and counting.) It wouldn't have done so if the missiles were deficient.
China has spent billions on J20 yet its chief designer was sacked. China spent billions on J15 yet it was found to be a shit. China has a history of spenging on shit.China designed the world's largest VLS cells and has placed this system in 25 destroyers and 8 cruisers (and counting.) It wouldn't have done so if the missiles were deficient.
Deficient systems have very short production runs like two or three examples not 33 (and counting!) like the Chinese UVLS and its missiles
There are many questions about Calcutta level, I will talk about it later
You are well come.
Both J-20 and J-15 are frontline fighters. I doubt you can get any frontline fighters without "spending billions." Chief designer of J-20 is Yang Wei and he is now President of China Aeronautical Society.
We know about the crash rate of j15Both J-20 and J-15 are frontline fighters. I doubt you can get any frontline fighters without "spending billions." Chief designer of J-20 is Yang Wei and he is now President of China Aeronautical Society.
Both Yang being fired and the J-15 as "shit" are both Indian wishful thinking
With Type 003 and its catapults, the J-15 will be among, if not the highest load carrying carrier aircraft ever with 8000kg load (it is a flanker after all!)
The J-15 had landed hundreds of times on the Liaoning and Shandong. There are only a handful of aircraft that can land on a carrier anywhere. Seems pretty successful to me. lol
I'm sorry, but it is just wishful thinking that a country that builds carriers and destroyers by the dozen would somehow build deficient planes and missiles by the hundreds and thousands
Again, poor performing systems have very limited production runs -- like two or three for ships or a handful for aircraft.
And for production run, we like to include all the latest tech, that's why production run of 2-3 for destroyers.Both J-20 and J-15 are frontline fighters. I doubt you can get any frontline fighters without "spending billions." Chief designer of J-20 is Yang Wei and he is now President of China Aeronautical Society.
Both Yang being fired and the J-15 as "shit" are both Indian wishful thinking
With Type 003 and its catapults, the J-15 will be among, if not the highest load carrying carrier aircraft ever with 8000kg load (it is a flanker after all!)
The J-15 had landed hundreds of times on the Liaoning and Shandong. There are only a handful of aircraft that can land on a carrier anywhere. Seems pretty successful to me. lol
I'm sorry, but it is just wishful thinking that a country that builds carriers and destroyers by the dozen would somehow build deficient planes and missiles by the hundreds and thousands
Again, poor performing systems have very limited production runs -- like two or three for ships or a handful for aircraft.
What is the crash rate of the J-15?
What is the crash rate of the J-15?
It’s Time to Talk About J-15, China’s First Carrierborne Fighter
Rumors of the J-15’s unreliability have been greatly exaggerated.thediplomat.com
It’s Time to Talk About J-15, China’s First Carrierborne Fighter
Rumors of the J-15’s unreliability have been greatly exaggerated.
In the context of such intensive flying, the lack of dedicated trainer aircraft, and the J-15’s status as an industry-first example of a fixed wing carrierborne aircraft for China, four accidents relating to the aircraft appears reasonable if not surprisingly low – especially as one of those accidents was a bird strike bearing no reflection on the aircraft itself. Certainly, assertions of the J-15 aircraft itself being somehow inherently flawed and in need of imminent replacement seem incredulous at present as of early 2021, given the variety of aforementioned J-15 test variants, as well as the restart of standard J-15 production from late 2019, and the expected production of a new CATOBAR compatible J-15 variant.
There were four crashes. One of them was a bird strike. The other three were in training of a new type on a land. Heavy usage since there is no carrier-capable trainer to carry training load. No accident on ship despite continuous use now on two carriers. So hardly the mark of an unreliable aircraft!
What's more, there are the J-15T CATOBAR, J-15S twin-seater and J-15D Growler variants in testing:
J-15T
View attachment 101452
J-15S
View attachment 101451
J-15D
View attachment 101450
I'm sorry, countries do not go around making multiple variants of deficient aircraft.
Indians have wishful, magical thinking about China.
China would magically build many variants of a defective plane just for India's benefit!
J15D Growler????What is the crash rate of the J-15?
It’s Time to Talk About J-15, China’s First Carrierborne Fighter
Rumors of the J-15’s unreliability have been greatly exaggerated.thediplomat.com
It’s Time to Talk About J-15, China’s First Carrierborne Fighter
Rumors of the J-15’s unreliability have been greatly exaggerated.
In the context of such intensive flying, the lack of dedicated trainer aircraft, and the J-15’s status as an industry-first example of a fixed wing carrierborne aircraft for China, four accidents relating to the aircraft appears reasonable if not surprisingly low – especially as one of those accidents was a bird strike bearing no reflection on the aircraft itself. Certainly, assertions of the J-15 aircraft itself being somehow inherently flawed and in need of imminent replacement seem incredulous at present as of early 2021, given the variety of aforementioned J-15 test variants, as well as the restart of standard J-15 production from late 2019, and the expected production of a new CATOBAR compatible J-15 variant.
There were four crashes. One of them was a bird strike. The other three were in training of a new type on a land. Heavy usage since there is no carrier-capable trainer to carry training load. No accident on ship despite continuous use now on two carriers. So hardly the mark of an unreliable aircraft!
What's more, there are the J-15T CATOBAR, J-15S twin-seater and J-15D Growler variants in testing:
J-15T
View attachment 101452
J-15S
View attachment 101451
J-15D
View attachment 101450
I'm sorry, countries do not go around making multiple variants of deficient aircraft.
Indians have wishful, magical thinking about China.
China would magically build many variants of a defective plane just for India's benefit!
Fanboys ruin any meaningful military discussions with nationalistic nonsense like the above. If 052D's were Indian you'd switch to praising them in a heartbeat.
