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

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

  1. Iron Man
    Offline

    Iron Man Captain
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    2,506
    Correct. And you are now digging an even deeper hole for yourself because you are at least acknowledging the true scale of "modification" needed to magically turn a Y-7 into an H-600, and yet refusing to acknowledge how impractical (or even impossible) this would be and simultaneously unable to provide a single example in all of aircraft history where a plane was shrunk down, gutted out, reboned, and facelifted into an essentially totally different much smaller plane with an entirely different role and launch/landing methods.

    I don't think the onus is on me at all. The default position (null hypothesis) is no change; a change (such as a different location of the landing gear) requires evidence from you, not from me.

    Secondly, even if the landing gear is located underneath the fuselage, it's not a big deal. Take this example:
    Air_Nostrum_ATR_72-600.jpg

    The only thing that is affected by the presence of a landing gear bulge in the fuselage is the fuselage and only in the specific area impacted, i.e. the middle section of that ATR.

    Third, I'm not talking about relocating an H-600's landing to the fuselage. If the H-600 was going to have a turbofan engine, it would have been designed from the ground up as a turbofan-engined plane, not modified from a turbopro-engined plane, because the PLAN has no prior experience in carrier-based AEW/C aircraft at all, so there is absolutely nothing to "modify".

    I'm not sure how it even remotely matters that none of them were derived from turboprops, since you were asking only about how many turbofan-engine aircraft had the kind of wings that the E-2 has. So now you are moving the goalposts to something else, and worse that something else is totally irrelevant.

    I'm not suggesting the H-600 can be "converted" into a turbofan-engine plane with only minor modifications. Not's not what I said. What I'm saying is that a turbofan H-600 would have been designed from the ground up as a turbofan H-600, since AGAIN, there are no blueprints that the PLAN possesses for a turboprop AEW/C plane that they would then have to "convert" into a turbofan AEW. The PLAN started with literally nothing and built the H-600 from the ground up. You keep getting stuck in the mindset of the PLAN having some kind of baseline "expertise" in a turboprop AEW and having to take some kind of extra risk to create a turbofan AEW when it isn't even remotely the case.

    They were canceled due to the cancelation of the Soviet Union, not because either design was flawed. Had the USSR not been canceled, both designs would almost certainly have gone forward into production.

    Read carefully what I said. I said that the USN did not specifically call for a turbofan-engine design, which is true. In fact "logistics support and aerial refueling" call for the same low-medium speed highly fuel-efficient aircraft that AEW/C planes call for.

    From this site http://www.airvectors.net/avs3.html it seems the USN had absolutely no interest in a Viking-based AEW:
     
  2. Bltizo
    Offline

    Bltizo Lieutenant General

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    14,438
    I think I've been quite consistent in using the word "substantially" from the beginning. If you've chosen to not place weight on that word then that is your choice.


    I think the onus is very much on you, because you would need to demonstrate the idea of having landing gear in the turbofan nacelles to be a viable configuration in the first place.



    I certainly agree that it would have to be designed ground up as a turbofan powered aircraft, and that has been my entire point, that developing such an aircraft would be higher risk than developing a turboprop driven aircraft given the PRC aerospace industry's prior experience.




    I was under the impression that you were saying that the H-600 airframe could be modified into a turbofan propelled aircraft without significant change. If you're saying that they would've developed an airframe intended for turbofans in the first place then that's an entirely different kettle of fish.



    I believe the PRC aerospace industry does have much more experience in turboprop driven small and medium aircraft that would be relevant for developing a turboprop carrier AEW&C yes. If the PRC aerospace industry had relevant experience in turbofan driven aircraft of that size as well then I wouldn't be making this argument.
     
    getready and ZeEa5KPul like this.
  3. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,277
    Likes Received:
    22,929
    So far the best and clearest images of the KJ-600 carrierborne AEW mock up ontop the carrier test facility in Wuhan.

    (Via LKJ86 / PDF)

    img-b6db10abf262b27fd56fc4b53a4238e1.jpg img-02deaa2f69af50561117cb32bc1bd1b6.jpg
     
    N00813, bruceb1959, jobjed and 11 others like this.
  4. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,228
    Likes Received:
    8,268
    If they allowed this photo I t must mean the time is close

    KJ-600 is big development

    Carrier AWACS gives situational awareness

    It can decide the out come of a confrontation
     
  5. KFX
    Offline

    KFX Just Hatched
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2019
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    2
    Quick Query. The designation "H-600" and "KJ-600" are used to interchangeably here, for what appears to be the same aircraft. "KJ" would be in keeping for a PLAAF bird, but would "H" suggest navy? More confusingly, "H" is also the prefix for the bombers: H-6, H-20.
     
    bruceb1959 and Deino like this.
  6. Deino
    Offline

    Deino Brigadier
    Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    9,277
    Likes Received:
    22,929
  7. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,007
    Likes Received:
    23,877
    Yes here is the translation

    Impending roll-out of the first Chinese embedded AWACS
    AIR
    BY
    HENRI KENHMANN

    2019-04-15
    While the big blocks of the 3rd Chinese aircraft carrier come out one after the other at the Shanghai shipyard Jiangnan Changxing, for a dry docking probably in the course of 2019 according to our estimate, another major amplifier component of the Chinese naval air force - AWACS embarked, able to take off from the flight deck using a catapult to ensure the surveillance of the sky as to the sea around the group - should also leave the assembly line and realize its first flight very soon.

    If this embedded AWACS project remains sensitive and has never appeared in any of the public documents, at least not directly named, we know that Chinese institutions have not stopped working on the various technical subjects since the early 2000s. . After the first concrete signs of the progress of the project in 2016 (see our " The Future of Chinese Embedded AWACS Emerging " and " One more step towards a Chinese embedded AWACS "), we have learned recently that the 603 Xi Institute In December 2018, it led the first real-scale drop test in China for an "onboard device".

    The text published on April 2 on the account of this AVIC consulting firm Weixin, specializing in the design of transport aircraft and bombers, obviously did not mention that this is a test for the AWACS embedded. It was even re-edited the day after so that the only word "embedded device" (舰载 机) initially appeared at the end of the article is deleted.

    But thanks to this text it is now known that these fall tests should be carried out before the "detailed design end" (详细 设计 发 图) milestone of the aircraft, and therefore before the availability of industrial plans, to serve as the one of the validation points on the design of the payloads, which would include the landing gear and the main radar system.

    • [​IMG]
      The end of the article published on the site of NRIET, before its re-edition (Image: NRIET)
    • [​IMG]
      From a real scale fall test study (Image: NWPU, AVIC)
    It should be noted that as an example, the FC-1 program had passed its milestone from the end of detailed design in October 2002, and the final assembly of the first prototype was completed in May 2003, before the inaugural flight which finally occurred in the month of August of the same year.

    Of course this is a big first for China, an AWACS embedded, so the time needed between the start of the industrial phase and the first flight of the prototype could be naturally more consistent. It is then reasonable to think that the roll-out of the first Chinese AWACS could take place by the end of 2019 or 2020.

    As for the type of radar chosen, rumors speak of an active antenna radar (AESA) mounted on a rotating disk, to favor the "width" of the radar so the number of modules installed, the power and the range, to the detriment of the rate if it had been a three-sided fixed configuration as for the KJ-2000 and the KJ-500. A quick calculation shows that in "back-to-back" configuration, the "width" of each radar face is about 15% higher than in the configuration of three fixed faces, but all of this remains to be confirmed.

    • [​IMG]
      The KLC-7 radar in a video presentation at the Zhuhai Show 2018
    • [​IMG]
      The AWACS KLC-7 radar model (Image: NRIET)
    At the last Zhuhai Air Show in November 2018, Institute 14 (NRIET) of the Chinese electronics group CETC presented a video in which an AWACS, with a back-to-back AESA radar, is unveiled at public. The aircraft, of rather average size and propelled by two turboprop engines, has a quadruple vertical tail. The set is reminiscent of the AWACS embedded in Chinese research papers, and of course the famous Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye .

    According to the description, this Chinese AWACS carries with it the KLC-7 radar, also called " Silk Road Eye " (丝路 眼), which is now offered for export. The latter is able to detect and track air targets, such as aircraft and flying missiles flying at very low altitude, as well as naval targets, and provide their coordinates in 3 dimensions.

    If we ignore its connection with the Chinese AWACS project that is under development, the Chinese radar operator says that China is the only country in the world to offer this type of radar on the international market today, while the AN / APY-9 developed by Lockheed Martin for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye program is likely to be in the same radar category even if the version is only for the US Army at the moment.

    [​IMG]
    On the flight deck of the aircraft carrier in Wuhan (Image: 齐天 大 猫 哥 手绘 手绘 手绘 用 用 用 用 用 号)
    Finally, it should be noted that an embedded AWACS model is mounted "on board" the aircraft carrier, in fact an electromagnetic compatibility study platform of the 701 Institute (CSIC) in Wuhan.

    This building is in transformation since 2016 to take the shape of the island of the 3rd Chinese aircraft carrier, a CATOBAR. The photos as of January 2017 show that the model is on the "flight deck" alongside a Z-8 helicopter and a J-15 onboard fighter, both in the form of a marquette also.
     
    N00813, mr.bean, Brumby and 2 others like this.
  8. asif iqbal
    Offline

    asif iqbal Brigadier

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,228
    Likes Received:
    8,268
    Building a Carrier based AWACS is not a easy task

    I mean they could build one but they could go into serious problems

    A carrier AWACS is more complicated than a JF17 fighter

    Did the Soviet Union ever fly their carrier AWACS? If no then this means China is only the second nation in the world to do so

    Launching a 40-50 ton plane will balancing a radar on top at sea from a carrier is nothing short of a miracle

    They could build one and launch it but can they fully commission a set of 4 x KJ-600 for 003 in 5 years?

    The technical difficulties are not to be understated

    The programme can be delayed and delayed like Type 726 LCAC

    Anyway let’s see how it plans out
     
  9. Neutral Zone
    Offline

    Neutral Zone Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    14
    Absolutely, I don’t think the Hawkeye gets the recognition it deserves, in my opinion it’s one of the greatest military aircraft designs ever. AEW requires a lot of computer power which in turn often needs an airliner sized airframe to carry it. To get all that gear into an airframe light and compact enough to operate off a carrier, is remarkable. I don’t think the Soviets ever got theirs past the mock up stage, China will no doubt be the second country to develop that capability, there’ll be some setbacks along the way but they’re prepared to throw enough money at it.
     
    antiterror13, bd popeye and Brumby like this.
  10. bd popeye
    Offline

    bd popeye The Last Jedi
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    28,799
    Likes Received:
    22,141
    True.

    A carrier air wing needs an AEW aircraft to achieve full functionality. Without proper early warning and guidance a modern air wing loses a lot of strike ablity.

    And there is a difference between AWACS and AEW;

    Airborne Early Warning [AEW] is the detection of enemy air or surface units by radar or other equipment carried in an airborne vehicle, and the transmitting of a warning to friendly units. Airborne early warning and control [AEW & C] is air surveillance and control provided by airborne early warning aircraft which are equipped with search and height-finding radar and communications equipment for controlling weapon systems.
    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/aew.htm

    The E-3 airborne warning and control system (AWACS) is built by Boeing Defense & Space Group. The role of the E-3 is to carry out airborne surveillance, and command, control and communications (C3) functions for both tactical and air defence forces.

    In a tactical role, the E-3 can detect and track hostile aircraft operating at low altitudes over any terrain, and can identify and control friendly aircraft in the same airspace. In the strategic defence role, the E-3 provides the means to detect, identify, track and intercept airborne threats.
    https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/e3awacs/
     
    N00813, asif iqbal and Brumby like this.
Loading...

Share This Page