KJ-600: Chinese carrier-capable AEW: developments, news, progress ...

Discussion in 'Navy' started by Bltizo, Jan 27, 2017.

  1. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,741
    Likes Received:
    24,998
  2. Intrepid
    Offline

    Intrepid Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,656
    Likes Received:
    1,799
    :) The Chinese Navy has a contract with Grumman and buys E-2?
     
  3. Twix101
    Offline

    Twix101 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    78
    Also the nose is pointing downwards on the mock-up.
     
    N00813 likes this.
  4. Dolcevita
    Online

    Dolcevita Junior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    972
    Likes Received:
    1,847

    Another translation by:
    Xavier Vavasseur
    Xavier is based in Paris, France. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in Management Information Systems and a Master of Business Administration from Florida Institute of Technology (FIT). Xavier has been covering naval defense topics for nearly a decade.

    https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/04/imminent-roll-out-for-chinas-first-carrier-based-awacs/
     
  5. Totoro
    Offline

    Totoro Captain
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    1,107
    Can someone re-do my measurements of that mockup AEW plane on the carrier deck mock up building?
    I went with assumption that those plane models on the deck, while not accurate when it comes to details, do have to be pretty accurate in dimensions. Otherwise what'd be the point to have them at all?

    If so, and if I take the flanker mockup as a reference point - i get some really weird dimensions.
    The AEW is 16.5 to 17 m long, with 32 meter wingspan (!!) and seems to be around 13.5 m wide when folded.
    Compare that with Yak-44 being 20.4 m long, 25.7 m wingspan.
    Or with E2, being 17.6 m long, having a 24.5 m wingspan and being 9 m wide when folded.

    Question is: are the mockups just wildly inaccurate themselves? (bonus question: why would they be? What's the point of them then?)
    Or is the real thing indeed with such huge wingspan. And if so, why would it have so much bigger wings compared to E2 and Yak44? Isn't deck space at a premium?
     
  6. Orthan
    Offline

    Orthan Junior Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    111
    IMO looking at the diferences betwen the j-15 mockups and the real thing could give an ideia.
     
  7. taxiya
    Offline

    taxiya Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,610
    Likes Received:
    7,880
    Maybe your calculation is wrong?

    From google earth photo, J-15 is 15.5m wingspan, the AWAC is 24.93m. We know that Su-33 is 14.7m wingspan, using that to correct the distortion of google earth measuring tool, the AWAC would be just above 24m in wingspan, same as E2.
     
  8. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,741
    Likes Received:
    24,998

    This image might help ...

    PLANAF carrier AEW KJ-600 - mock up at Wuhan 201801 part+.jpg
     
    bluewater2012 likes this.
  9. Totoro
    Offline

    Totoro Captain
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    1,107
    thanks guys. i must say i dont get it how one image (satelliet one) can show one difference in dimensions and the other image [​IMG]
    has a completely different ratio of wingspan difference between the two.

    But I'd certainly tend to trust the GE satellite imagery more, as it showed itself to be pretty accurate in the past.
     
    kenvui and mys_721tx like this.
  10. taxiya
    Offline

    taxiya Major
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    3,610
    Likes Received:
    7,880
    Problems with this photo are:
    1. Three dimensional distortion, where lines of same length that are not in parallel will be different in measurement.
    2. Lack of complete measuring points on the J-15, meaning that you have to rely on measuring the mid point of the fuselage from the right wingtip, a degree off will mean big error.
    GE is more reliable because it is almost 2D (top view from far away). GE's shortcoming is the low resolution leading to one pixel being 10cm or more.
     
Loading...

Share This Page