How is wingspan a challenge? This plane would certainly be able to fold its wings just like E-2C/D.
KJ-600 carrierborne AEWC thread
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Nice CGI of KJ 600 When are we going to see this in real?
KJ-600 CGI by Lovely_Swift.
KJ-600 CGI by Lovely_Swift.
But did the concrete carrier mock up get bigger?
If not, that implies the first Chinese CATOBAR carrier would still be based on the Kuznetsov/liaoning dimensions and hull.
Which in turn suggest both Liaoning and Shamgdong may be readily refitted at a later date with catapults to bring them up to the standard of the first Chinese CATOBSR carrier.
If not, that implies the first Chinese CATOBAR carrier would still be based on the Kuznetsov/liaoning dimensions and hull.
Which in turn suggest both Liaoning and Shamgdong may be readily refitted at a later date with catapults to bring them up to the standard of the first Chinese CATOBSR carrier.
That's just too lazy for a CGI. It is E-2 with Chinese insignia slapped on.Nice CGI of KJ 600 When are we going to see this in real?
KJ-600 CGI by Lovely_Swift.
Except for the non-rotating radome.
Considering the real KJ-600 will likely look very similar to that, I'd say the CGI is probably on point.
A lazy CGI would be if they took a preexisting CGI of an E-2 and slapped a Chinese insignia on it. This entire piece of work is original.
If you really want to attribute laziness, you could say the Chinese Navy is lazy for using a similar proven configuration to the E-2 platform for their carrierborne AEW&C, but I'd argue that is more a reflection of the Navy being practical and safe.
There is no evidence the basic E-2 layout is flawed, so there is no real reason to suggest why the Chinese carrier EAWC ought not to adopt the same layout.
However, that being said, there are a number of distinguishing detailed features on the E-2 that is the accidental artifact of that plane's particular design process, and not of its basically sound layout. These features is unlikely to,be repeated in a new EAWC design that happen to take advantage of the same proven layout. One example is the layout of the windows on the flight deck.
The CGI copied these verbatim. To sameone who is familiar with the E-2, the presence of its flight deck window arrangement on a CGI of what is supposedly a foreign aircraft designed by a completely unrelated foreign firm immediately says that's not much of a CGI effort, it is?
However, that being said, there are a number of distinguishing detailed features on the E-2 that is the accidental artifact of that plane's particular design process, and not of its basically sound layout. These features is unlikely to,be repeated in a new EAWC design that happen to take advantage of the same proven layout. One example is the layout of the windows on the flight deck.
The CGI copied these verbatim. To sameone who is familiar with the E-2, the presence of its flight deck window arrangement on a CGI of what is supposedly a foreign aircraft designed by a completely unrelated foreign firm immediately says that's not much of a CGI effort, it is?
Sorry to disagree and even if I agree the KJ-600 will most likely share the same overall configuration and size, this is plain and simple (at least IMO) a lazy 1 on 1 copy of a Hawkeye just with PLANAF-markings on.
I don't know in what certain details it will differ or if it will even look like this one...
I for myself hope that it will at least be a bit more different.
Deino
The vertical stabilizers on this CGI are about the same size as the ones on the E-2 but there are only two of them, which means they are probably insufficient to control yaw in their current configuration.
