Which country has the most powerful carrier airwing right now?

Certainly not the one that's flying chinkshit derived from slavshit

not the one with single digit "5th" gen fighters

china. The only nation that can launch a 5th gen from EMALS.

What the fuck do you think? Discussing the 2nd most powerful might at least be interesting

>>63883714 (OP)
Considering China doesn't currently field (operational) carrier stealth fighters, the US Navy has them beat, and don't give me any of that horseshit about 'oh hurr durr they conducted test flights of J-35 on da carrier', who cares? Until they are fielded in an operational, combat ready capacity they are useless for carrier ops.

The US Navy has years of carrier warfare experience, and the F-35 (while still young) has seen worldwide service, and currently seems to be the best multi-role carrier fighter. Dont get me started on the F-18, it is essentially the perfect light-medium fighter. However, it would be better if a bit bigger with longer range, which is why I wish the F-14 was in service.

I will give the credit to China for having an larger multi-role aircraft, the loss of the F-14 was really a step back, and I doubt its capabilities will ever be deemed as important as they were. Modern A-A combat is almost exclusively with BVR missiles, anything else generally means one of the pilots fucked up (or both). In 2025, no enemy aircraft should get within range of cannons, or even further, AIM-9 type (or similar) weapons. Many designers may find shorter endurance more appealing as it allows more interior space for weapons and electronics, but without range effective screening of the carrier group is severely compromised. Ship based air defenses cant do everything, some things need to be prevented from launching altogether.

The US Navy air wing alone is more powerful than any other countries air force

>>63883788
>the F-35 (while still young) has seen worldwide service, and currently seems to be the best multi-role carrier fighter.
kek.
for this the f-35c would need to be able to attack ships.

>>63883714 (OP)
USN
Bongs
France
China????? (Unproven)

Jap Supercarriers when?

>>63883738
Probably China. Even though England and Italy operate a larger naval stealth airwing the chinks simply have more and larger carriers. Plus they have Hawkeye clones where England still uses helicopter AEW
>France
Could be number 2 if they could unfuck CdG and get PANG up and running

>>63883989
It can carry LRASMs, but only when externally mounted so it’s a bit of a cop out, and there’s little reason to not just use a hornet instead in that situation. It is technically capable of engaging surface targets however

>>63883989
While I assume it can already carry various AShM systems, it is currently being certified for the LRASM. It cant fit them in the weapons bay, but once dropped it would likely be much harder to retaliate against the aircraft due to its lower RCS.

The F-18 also seems to serve in the role of AShM boats.

>>63884074
I’ve wondered if the pylons themselves can be dropped mid flight to recover stealth properties. There’s probably a panel over the mounting points when they’re not attached though so maybe it wouldn’t make a huge difference since you’d have large flat stretches of material with no RAM coating

>>63884074
>The F-18 also seems to serve in the role of AShM boats.
Here is one with 4 Harpoon missiles, sure, not quite the LRASM, but it is smaller and more suitable for lighter ships.

Nonetheless the F-18 can also carry the LRASM, along with harpoons (or more LRASM's)...

>>63884091
Nope, they cant. It would likely be prohibitively expensive to simply ditch all the electronics and tech within the pylon. In the near future, I bet there will be leovertures in stealth tech, such as making low-observability pylons viable and accessible.

>>63884096
It can also use old stocks of AIM-7’s in an AShM role if the need ever arises, funnily enough

>>63883980
PLAAF has several hundred J-20 at this point, wouldn't be so sure.

>>63884113
The Sparrow, so prolific it has practically been used for every purpose such a missile can be used for, and the best part is that it is almost 70 years young and still being used.

Really speaks for the stockpiles built during the cold war.

>pic rel, HARM variant of the Sparrow.

>>63883714 (OP)
are you fucking retarded?
US>>>China>Uk/France>Japan/Italy>every other shit

I never liked the way they kind Flankerized the rear section of the J-35, the FC-31 looks better.

>>63883714 (OP)
>US
>POWER GAP
>
>
>
>
>
>China
>UK
>France

>>63883989
yeah

>>63885441
>I can't make magnets
>I can't make ships
>I'M CANCELLING!

>>63884096
>It would likely be prohibitively expensive to simply ditch all the electronics and tech within the pylon
Is there really that much going on inside the pylon? I would think it'd mostly be passthrough stuff to connect whatever munition to the onboard computer.

>>63885444
>>63884074
Quicksink my beloved
Imagine the carnage if Chinks try a D-day with civilian ships

>>63885444
>>63885870
>>63884074

>>63885904
Cool art
It's cope tho

>>63885904
>posts his chink fanfic art
sooooo mad and womanly

>>63884128
considering the hacked reports about the J-20, i'm not terribly concerned that it poses a serious threat in the state it's in. actually insane what they consider 'mission ready' for a stealth jet. RAM should not be optional.

>>63885904
I cant imagine a better way to annoy the US then by managing to sink one of its Supercarriers l. I wish a wolf warrior would

>>63885904
If you actually look at the trajectory of the missile most prominent in the image it would miss the carrier

I like the shark emblem on that Flanker.

>>63883738
I'd argue France (when their carrier works and can gather the support needed for a voyage). Strong multi-role jet, catapults so they can have a fixed-wing early warning aircraft.
Third would be tied the UK and Japan. Two carriers each, both operating the F-35.

>>63886753
France having just one carrier and no 5th gen aircraft is a pretty big negative though. I agree that for now they're ahead until both the UK carriers can actually run a full capacity airwing.

surprisingly Italy
it's all about quality macaroni

>Which country has the most powerful carrier airwing right now?

>>63887318
I've suprisingly heard some negative reports on the sort of slop that the pasta navy serves.

>>63884128
>wouldn't be so sure.
I would be.
Effectiveness of carrier air isn't about how many "fancy" aircraft you have relative to someone else, it's about how long they're operators have been competently operating off of carriers (*operating*, meaning undertaking combat sorties as well as just being deployed at sea).
The US with Midnight Hammer is getting all the attention paid to the Air Force component with the B2s, but over 100 aircraft took part in the strike with many of them being Naval aviation.
When China can carry off a hundred-plus aircraft complex strike mission and have the part where their Naval aviation took part be so mundane in it's flawless execution that it's a nothingburger to note it, then China is in the running to be compared to US Carrier-based aviation.

This isn't really a matter of debate for anyone that isn't irrationally simping for sinos.

>>63885974
What are the hacked reports?

>>63887318
Not at all. They got rid of one of their 'carriers' and only have one and it doesn't have a full complement of fighters. It's USA then probably Bongs, China, France, India.

This shit is honestly delusional OP

>>63884027
>Bongs
didn't one of their only 2 carriers break down immediately after launching? and they aren't bothering to build a catapult carrier like the French have and the Chinese are doing. This means no carrier launched AWACS etc.

>>63883714 (OP)
Def not china lmao

>>63885904
this is what's gonna happen, a drone and missile zergrush that will suppress all countermeasures and sink entire carrier taskforces.

>>63886246
It's cool but so is the >>63887311 bat emblem here.

>>63888139
Too bad we'll never see vfa-103 flying them

>>63884027
>Jap Supercarriers when?
Probably when they accept 5% spending Trump started to demand.