Military Review

China builds aircraft to detect enemy stealth aircraft

34
China is developing a reconnaissance aircraft equipped with a radar system that will help detect enemy "invisible airplanes", Chinese military observers say. It is assumed that the aircraft with the name KJ-600 will be based on a new aircraft carrier, according to the International Business Times


China builds aircraft to detect enemy stealth aircraft

archive photo


According to Chinese military experts, the KJ-600 will be equipped with an advanced radar with an active phased-array antenna (AFAR), which will allow the aircraft to detect stealth United States aircraft such as the F-22 and F-35.

It is assumed that the aircraft can be used both as an early warning system for radar detection and control (AEWS), and for controlling decked aircraft and coordinating their actions in the air. The biggest advantage of the KJ-600 is a more advanced radar and communication system, which allows you to control a wide range of signals and even detect airplanes created using radio-visible reduction technologies.

The report says that KJ-600 is being developed by Xian Aircraft Corporation. It is assumed that the aircraft will weigh 25-30 tons and have two turboprop engines FWJ-6C. The Chinese reconnaissance aircraft is likely to have a crew of five to six people. The team will include a pilot, co-pilot, and the rest of the crew will work on radar and combat control systems.
Photos used:
https://twitter.com/xinfengcao
34 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 25 January 2018 12: 37
    +2
    which will allow the aircraft to detect stealth aircraft of the United States, such as the F-22 and F-35.

    ... the Chinese have indicated directly which planes they will detect ..
    1. ul_vitalii
      ul_vitalii 25 January 2018 13: 04
      +6
      By that time they will remain, and the old things will be sold to their next friends.
  2. Andrey Ostroushko
    Andrey Ostroushko 25 January 2018 12: 40
    0
    I know that the Chinese have long been copying Russian technology, but to clone an American? For the first time I see. And yet, it seems to me alone that this Su-57 is double or have I missed something?
    1. NN52
      NN52 25 January 2018 14: 11
      11
      Andrey Ostroushko

      This is for India .... They wanted such a double .... Su 57 ... I forgot how the program is called ..
      But something this program stalled somehow ....
      This is just a photo. Computer graphics.
  3. NEXUS
    NEXUS 25 January 2018 12: 43
    +3
    But our Premier A-100 is still only being tested ... at the same time there is still a big question, how many of them will be purchased by the Moscow Region for the Airborne Forces. And we need 30-40 airborne aircraft ... and the antipode of the flying radar should be updated, and not to do it on the basis of IL-18, the development of 68 years.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 25 January 2018 12: 52
      +1
      That's right to say - our A-100 is already in trials. And this one is just being built. More precisely developed. If there is no weight or number of crew. And it is not known how much worse it will be A-100.
      1. thinker
        thinker 25 January 2018 13: 02
        0
        More precisely developed.

        Photography is September last year, so it’s also a test.
      2. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 25 January 2018 16: 25
        +1
        He is not a competitor to the A-50/100 at all ... we still have no plans for such planes .... there is no carrier and equipment ... this is an analogue of the E-2 and we need to compare it with it ...
        1. Topotun
          Topotun 25 January 2018 16: 39
          +2
          It's a shame that we had a similar development, year 1988. Yak-44E. [media = http: //airwar.ru/image/i/spy/yak44-i.jpg]
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 25 January 2018 16: 56
            +2
            There were two projects ... another An-72 with a plate on the tail.
    2. Vita vko
      Vita vko 25 January 2018 12: 59
      +1
      Quote: NEXUS
      We need 30-40 airborne aircraft.

      AWACS aircraft should be classified as an offensive type of armament for warfare on someone else’s territory or sea zone, and of course it is still possible to consider it as a means of reinforcement in the threatened period, but this is rather the exception. The fact is that these expensive cars do not carry combat duty in peacetime and, as a result, help little in repelling a sudden strike. But 30-40 radio engineering units with guidance points along the border, which would reduce the lower border of the radar field to at least 100 m, and not 4000 as it is now, and even then not everywhere, would be just right. And it would have been cheaper at times.
      1. yehat
        yehat 26 January 2018 11: 32
        0
        both are needed to create more or less reliable detection capabilities,
        but most importantly, we need coordination machines in the air so that all sorts of Turks do not shoot down our planes.
    3. novel66
      novel66 25 January 2018 13: 12
      +3
      missed the chip - it’s for the aircraft carrier - and we have such request
      1. san4es
        san4es 25 January 2018 16: 36
        +2
        Quote: novel xnumx
        missed the chip - it’s for the aircraft carrier - and we have such request

        ... That's for sure ... Further in Chinese:

        July 2017
        1. novel66
          novel66 25 January 2018 17: 53
          0
          well, is this the AN-24?
          1. san4es
            san4es 25 January 2018 18: 15
            +1
            Quote: novel xnumx
            well, is this the AN-24?

            ... No, not like ... Take a look:
            1. novel66
              novel66 25 January 2018 18: 41
              +1
              the tail has changed a little - business something! he, dear!
    4. yehat
      yehat 26 January 2018 05: 03
      0
      IL-18 successful base
      amers b52 flies a long time
      the main thing is that things go
      I’m curious about something else - which way the Chinese went - made a long-wave radar
      either with dynamic modulation of the signal or stupidly increased the power and accuracy of signal processing
      or some distortion analysis algorithms have written. or something new stolen.
      I do not like the fact that our military is now almost 80% based on the elemental base of China and our equipment will be stably inferior at the level of iron.
  4. Piramidon
    Piramidon 25 January 2018 13: 33
    0
    Does he remind me of the An-26 alone?
    1. NN52
      NN52 25 January 2018 14: 36
      10
      You alone ....

      They copied it from the Amerov Grumman E-2 Hokai ....
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 25 January 2018 14: 55
      +1
      Quote: Piramidon
      Does he remind me of the An-26 alone?

      That's what he recalls, right up to the last screw - the Yak-44 ... am

      1. NN52
        NN52 25 January 2018 15: 02
        10
        For the prototype of Yak 44, E 2 Hokai was chosen ....
        But they didn’t bring the program to mind ...
        1. NN52
          NN52 25 January 2018 15: 17
          +9


          Here is the Amer Hokai ...
      2. Skifotavr
        Skifotavr 26 January 2018 01: 33
        0
        By the way, than spraying billions on any garbage, it would be better to revive Kuznetsov’s design bureau and recreate an engine similar to D-27, which he developed together with Zaporizhzhya Motor Sich. Such an engine will not be priced for operational-tactical military-technical cooperation, or for a DRO carrier-based aircraft, both on a failed Yak-44. I heard that in 100-150 years you’re going to build aircraft carriers, so you need to start now. smile
        1. yehat
          yehat 26 January 2018 05: 13
          0
          production should be cost-effective, not everything at the expense of defense of the order should pay off.
          And where else to put these engines, except for a small series of AWACS aircraft?
          Small aircraft are almost absent due to legislation and economic conditions.
          We need a market, then a factory of engines. Our stupid bureaucrats fall into the same shit cake over and over again - all artificial non-banging projects squeeze the budget,
          because the army is not 2 superplanes, but links and regiments. But you need to build this not for trillions of the budget, but cheaper, there is no other way. And all artificial projects stoke the army.
          Yes, this is possible in the most popular and complex places of technology, but engines need to be done normally.
          1. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 27 January 2018 05: 25
            0
            Those engines are based on the unique average An-70 military transport developed in the USSR, and it was they who basically made that aircraft unique - very powerful, but economical due to extremely high efficiency. Thanks to them, the aircraft requires a very short distance for takeoff, and the path length during landing and landing speed are also very small. That is why they are ideal for light carrier-based aircraft AWACS. In the west, there are no such engines, but now and nowhere else will be. In general, it is sad that this has to be reminded of in forums, and Russian officials, for example, dream of making a passenger plane out of Tu-160. This is not even funny. request
            1. yehat
              yehat 29 January 2018 12: 16
              0
              Come on, we’d dream, but there was real experience that comes from such transformations!
              As far as I know, such transformations are normal only if a dual purpose is planned at the design stage. For example, He-111. But even that is mediocrity
              And from the Tu-160 perspective, the transformation is completely dull.
              What amateurs who offer such a thing just think?
              I even know this primitive logic - "reliable, flies, tested in the army, so it will pull in a civilian" ... no matter how!
              The most striking example is the misadventures of the Tu-154. The plane is beautiful, but the noise and fuel consumption are tin. Engines with a bomber!
  5. I doubt it
    I doubt it 25 January 2018 15: 33
    0
    Yeah...
    Two aircraft carriers with DLRO aircraft, this is very serious.
    Pacific Fleet can "quietly smoke" aside ....
  6. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 January 2018 16: 27
    +1
    God forbid, just make an AWACS of this class, the usual one is not deck ... Without serial IL-112/114, one can only dream of.
  7. Achtaba1970
    Achtaba1970 25 January 2018 19: 56
    0
    Well, the Chinese have just begun to build an aircraft carrier with a "catapult", and without it, this Chinese "Hokai" will not take off, the springboard will not lift it. So this device is for the future.
    1. yehat
      yehat 26 January 2018 05: 18
      0
      let me disagree. Remember the amer raid at the beginning of WW2 on Japan. Similar planes took off without a catapult. I think you can make an ala hokai plane that can take off from a flat deck (a springboard is just a rare tin !!!) without a catapult. They did the same in 2, which took off at a speed of 20-30 km / h.
  8. moreman78
    moreman78 26 January 2018 08: 09
    0
    Quote: yehat
    let me disagree. Remember the amer raid at the beginning of WW2 on Japan. Similar planes took off without a catapult. I think you can make an ala hokai plane that can take off from a flat deck (a springboard is just a rare tin !!!) without a catapult. They did the same in 2, which took off at a speed of 20-30 km / h.

    Sometimes it's better to chew than carry nonsense
    1. yehat
      yehat 26 January 2018 11: 27
      0
      I referred to specific historical examples - Doolittle raid, in-2.
      if you disagree with them, it’s worth making a story
  9. gla172
    gla172 26 January 2018 11: 22
    0


    .... two photos .... two articles ....
    ... just rushed into the eye ..... wink