PLAN dedicated carrier-borne AEW Thread (KJ-600 or KH-600)

Discussion in 'Navy' started by delft, Jul 7, 2017.

  1. Lethe
    Online

    Lethe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,016
    Likes Received:
    1,366
    Form follows function. The Yak-44 looked like an E-2 as well.
     
  2. Deino
    Online

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,276
    Likes Received:
    22,928
    Some news via DafengCao:

    https://twitter.com/dafengcao/status/1113398430464741376



    And his reply to my question on if already a full-sized static specimen is done?

     
    bruceb1959, Hendrik_2000 and N00813 like this.
  3. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,538
    Likes Received:
    9,910
    Not as closely as this does. images (1).jpeg
    First the Yak was bigger. Also mounted the Dish differently. Also the beefier nacelles would have had coaxial props as opposed to the conventional types found in E2. Little novelty about E2 is both props rotate in the same direction this is abnormal and causes the aircraft to be eccentric with power changes.
    Then there is the folding. yakovlev-yak44-aew-aircraft.jpg this is the closest it ever came to being deployed or built. The Mock up on a carrier deck. Note the way the wings fold here over the top.
    E2 fold like this. images (2).jpeg
    Along the sides. And note the Yak has Only two verticals on its tail as opposed to the 4 we see on the E2.
    But this far everything is so close to E2 It looks like some one PS' d Chinese markings on an E2. download (1).jpeg

    Like I said I had been hoping for a jet. Something like an S3 Viking with a phased array. images (3).jpeg
    The USN had been looking at that for a time.
     
    davidau likes this.
  4. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Lieutenant General

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    14,435
    All about risk reduction.

    Considering this is the PLAN's first attempt at a carrierborne AEW&C and considering all of the other complex platforms integral to a carrier and its airwing and the many firsts that the PLAN would be doing in its history, I think it would be rather irresponsible if they did not choose the most well proven configuration for their own platform if they could help it.
     
    N00813, jobjed and KIENCHIN like this.
  5. Iron Man
    Offline

    Iron Man Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    2,506
    The reason for a turboprop over a turbofan is as simple as fuel efficiency, no other explanation needed. The turboprop is far more efficient at low to medium airspeeds than a turbofan, which allows the AEW aircraft to loiter on station far longer than the same aircraft with turbofans. If this were not the case I'm certain the US and Soviet navies would have used/switched to turbofan AEW aircraft long ago.

    There is no risk reduction here. Everything for the PLAN is new as far as an AEW aircraft is concerned in terms of integrating various systems together. And as far as turbofans go, the PLAN is not exactly new to those. A suitable one could be the ones used on the L-15, or another turbofan purchased from Russia. The point of choosing a turboprop isn't about risk reduction, it's about fuel efficiency.
     
    #95 Iron Man, Apr 4, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2019
    Brumby likes this.
  6. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Lieutenant General

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    14,435
    Relative to developing a turbofan powered carrier AEW&C airframe, I think pursuing the E-2 configuration turboprop driven airframe does have reduced risk. For the record, I'm talking about the physical aircraft (airframe, powerplant, flight controls) rather than the radar system or combat management system aboard the aircraft.

    Not only do they have relatively proven turboprops (the ones used aboard Y-9 family) to derive a powerplant from for H-600, but they also have a suitable airframe in the form of Y-7 which is appropriate to substantially modify into a new aircraft for carrier operations. Furthermore, this configuration being a proven one that the USN has been using for decades also likely means it is perceived as more proven for the PLA as well.

    OTOH, the PRC aerospace industry do not have an appropriate turbofan powered airframe that they could adapt for carrier operations nor do they have an indigenous (which while not essential, it would certainly be preferable) turbofan in that class available at present that could be derived for a turbofan for a carrier AEW&C.



    I think if the PRC aerospace industry happened to have the right pieces that already happened to be in place to allow relatively lower risk development of a turbofan powered AEW&C then they might have considered it in lieu of the E-2 configuration they've chosen. After all, we've seen the PLA take on certain new directions which could be perceived as higher risk but which makes sense given potential benefits of success as well as enjoying the fruits of preceding R&D (e.g. going for EM catapults rather than steam).
    However for the carrierborne AEW&C project I think the risk of developing a turboprop driven E-2 configuration aircraft would've been perceived as much lower than developing a turbofan driven aircraft.

    Developing a turboprop driven, E-2 configuration carrier AEW&C will be new for the PLA and have an amount of risk -- but developing a turbofan driven carrier AEW&C will also be new for the PLA and likely carry higher risk considering the available existing powerplants and existing airframes they had to work with not to mention choosing an AEW&C configuration that does not have the long service history that the E-2 does.
     
  7. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    882
    I am unsure if in the long run these kinds of radar platforms make sense though. I think something like a drone would probably work better.
     
  8. Iron Man
    Offline

    Iron Man Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    2,506
    The Y-7 is grossly inappropriate for a carrier-based AEW/C aircraft. I don't think you would have said that had you compared the sizes of the E-2 and Yak-44 to a Y-7 beforehand. It is simply not sensible to "substantially modify" something that large and simultaneously unsuited for catapult ops into a compact carrier-based AEW/C plane. The H-600 mockup also looks nothing like a substantially modified Y-7 but rather a ground-up new design modelled after (or at least inspired by) the E-2 and Yak-44. And just because a turboprop is used on the E-2 doesn't mean there is any kind of risk reduction when designing the H-600 using a turboprop; it would be even worse if you are talking about shoehorning a bastardized Y-7 into the role. As far as the PRC aerospace industry is concerned, I have no doubt that they considered the merits of turboprop vs turbofan in detail and came to the exact same conclusion that both the US and the Soviets did.
     
    Brumby likes this.
  9. Intrepid
    Offline

    Intrepid Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,515
    Likes Received:
    1,592
    This is normal for aircraft bigger than general aviation.
     
  10. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    11,538
    Likes Received:
    9,910
    The Soviet navy never had a carrier capabilities beyond The Kuznetsov which was a very recent development of the late late early 1980s early to mid 1990s. As such they are a very very poor basis of comparison. The vast majority of there Carrier AEW being very recent Rotary wing.

    The E2 was developed in the 1960s
    Since then the USN has studied and run replacement programs for the E2 series including Jet based AEW a number of times the biggest attempt being the CSA which Lockheed Martin proposed a COD Viking and AEW Viking. The main issues being that the Navy wanted to spend its funding elsewhere and Congress was in the early 90s looking for a "Peace Dividend" investing in even a massive redesign of C2 E2 was subject to that cutting. Recently the Navy finally started a replacement of C2 for V22.
    There is a degree of reasonability here. Y7 is larger than optimum. Then again even on a super carrier E2 takes up a large amount of deck space. Even V22 on deck prevents large amount of deck use.
    In a way what they built was a kitbash of Y7 emulating E2. But the PRC in this case I think was looking to follow E2 as close as they could.
    That appears to be the next tract of all AEW not just Carrier based. The evolution of computers, Data links, Low Observable, Long range intigrated Air defense system with equally long range missiles make manned AEW more and more risky and less effective.
     
    Brumby likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page