Military Review

China wants to detect F-35 using deck versions of upgraded An-24

52
China continues to explore opportunities under the program to create a deck-based long-range detection aircraft.


China wants to detect F-35 using deck versions of upgraded An-24


Command previously expressed interest in creating such an aircraft, which to one degree or another would be similar to the American Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.

The program also includes research on the creation of the deck tactical aircraft - the Chinese version of the American Grumman C-2 Greyhound.

Work has been done over the past few years using the Chinese Y-7 turboprop aircraft as a base model. This is a licensed copy of the Soviet An-24. The last Y-7 in the PRC was assembled in 2000 year. After that, the production was reoriented to the release of Xian MA60. In fact, this is an upgrade option for the same An-24.

At the exit, China is going to get at least two deck versions of such aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of 22 tons and two turboprop engines.

The main question that the PRC is trying to answer in this connection is: can such a plane become part of the aircraft wing of the Liaoning aircraft carrier? Chinese journalists of the SINA edition write that this problem is solved.

From the material:

Americans sell their F-35 to Japan and South Korea. This is a problem for the PLA Navy. But in China for many years, technologies for detecting aircraft with low visibility have been tested. In particular, on airplanes with the base model Y-7 (An-24 version), the locator with AFAR in the fairing is implemented. This can allow you to resist stealth fighters F-35 when performing missions over the sea.


At least in China they want to be able to detect using deck versions of these aircraft.

If the project of a long-range carrier-based long-range aircraft is implemented, then the planes that emerged from the An-24 project will be entered into a network-centric structure, which will also include deck fighters and aircraft carrier strike groups.
Photos used:
CCTV
52 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. WILL
    WILL 14 June 2019 14: 15
    +7
    That's awesome! belay it has been in operation since 1962, and is still relevant! Yes, they knew how to design and build! That is what MADE IN THE USSR! good
    1. himRa
      himRa 14 June 2019 14: 27
      -1
      I must admit that the modernization resource is large
      Grumman E-2 Hawkeye also flew 60, but why do they need a deck version? 22 tons
      not 17 at a gruman ... every time to throw out and plant it anyway on the ground or not ...?
      1. Shuttle
        Shuttle 14 June 2019 17: 01
        +1
        Quote: himRa
        22 tons are not 17 from the Grumann ... every time you throw it out and put it all the same on the ground or not ...?

        He is actually "Hawkeye", that is. "Hawk eye", in the sense of "Hawkeye". And it weighs 17 tons dry. And its maximum take-off weight is 23,5 tons. True, unlike our Annushka and the kitty Y-7, it was originally a specialized AWACS aircraft. Actually, the Chinese are trying to implement the same function. Because both then, and now, any plane wants a vehicle. "to sit high to look far". That's why they saw the AWACS plane.
    2. insafufa
      insafufa 14 June 2019 14: 28
      +3
      It was possible for them to approach our Yakovlev Design Bureau; they already have groundwork for the Yak 44e radar
      1. NEOZ
        NEOZ 14 June 2019 15: 50
        +3
        Quote: insafufa
        It was possible for them to approach our Yakovlev Design Bureau

        I agree!
        joint development, we, too, would not be prevented by AWACS aircraft!
        ps
        I don’t understand why they put you a minus.
        1. Rzzz
          Rzzz 17 June 2019 09: 25
          -1
          There are no engines for the Yak-44. According to the project there D-27 with unique characteristics. And you can forget about them.
      2. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 14 June 2019 16: 30
        0
        Quote: insafufa
        It was possible for them to approach our Yakovlev Design Bureau; they already have groundwork for the Yak 44e radar

        These developments are worthless, the generally weak KB is constantly engaged in copy-paste and worthless copy-paste, because the Chinese have no sense in cooperating. you have to pay)
      3. Berkut154
        Berkut154 14 June 2019 18: 11
        0
        For many years, Ukrainians have been idle for two AN-71 air traffic control units, it was just created as a carrier-based aircraft DRLO for the nuclear aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk.
    3. Nasrat
      Nasrat 14 June 2019 14: 33
      -5
      Quote: ANIMAL
      ..Here, that means MADE IN THE USSR! good

      Why the heck to tie everything to the USSR? What kind of symbolism implicated in false patriotism .. What is more or less suitable in China for this business, the Chinese are trying to adapt to their tasks ...
    4. TermNachTer
      TermNachTer 14 June 2019 18: 00
      -1
      And if you put the D - 27 engine on it, it will generally be very similar to a "hockey".
    5. Pavel Tsybai
      Pavel Tsybai 15 June 2019 06: 58
      0
      I live on Sakhalin. For the past two weeks, ANs have been flying constantly. I live right under the take-off. But I understand that this is 26. But the army.
  2. Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Obi-Wan Kenobi 14 June 2019 14: 15
    +2
    Well done the Chinese!
    An interesting idea. I would like to see the aircraft taking off from an aircraft carrier.
    1. loki565
      loki565 14 June 2019 14: 23
      +3
      Well, this is not new, only engines need more power, like amers.
      1. himRa
        himRa 14 June 2019 14: 33
        -3
        the bastard didn't even gurgle !!!!!
        1. kit88
          kit88 14 June 2019 14: 54
          +8
          The bastard has engines of 2 × 4910 hp
          For comparison
          An-24 - 2 × 2550 liters. with.
          Xian MA60 - 2 x 2750 l. with
          Feel the difference. Something the Chinese have narseril new, since the deck version is muddied.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Bongo
      Bongo 14 June 2019 15: 28
      +8
      Quote: Obi Wan Kenobi
      Well done the Chinese!
      An interesting idea. I would like to see the aircraft taking off from an aircraft carrier.

      The mass-overall dimensions of the An-24 do not allow it to be placed on aircraft carriers. In the People's Republic of China, in fact, in the past, AWACS aircraft based on Y-7 (in the satellite image) were tested, but these were flying laboratories and there is no talk of mass production of such machines.

      At the moment in the PRC, work is underway to create a "flying deck radar" KJ-600 based on a glider created from scratch.
      1. A1845
        A1845 14 June 2019 16: 00
        +1
        Quote: Bongo
        At the moment in the PRC, work is underway to create a "flying deck radar" KJ-600 based on a glider created from scratch.

        already for the catapult, apparently?
  3. yehat
    yehat 14 June 2019 14: 29
    -1
    I have some misunderstandings about this project
    1. How realistic is it to change (lengthen) the frequency of the location so that invisibility in the root is eliminated?
    2. An-24 is a strong aircraft, but it seems to me that for Avik it will be necessary to significantly modify it -
    and not only the chassis, but also the wing.
    3. will this new Chinese be a full-fledged AWACS aircraft or only an element specializing in updating the aircraft situation data?
    4. What is the real effectiveness
    1. The seventh
      The seventh 14 June 2019 15: 17
      -1
      1. It will not work at the root ... But the wavelength and power of the location can be increased in accordance with the increase in size, which will be an undoubted increase in the detection efficiency ...
    2. dauria
      dauria 14 June 2019 15: 42
      +1
      1. How realistic is it to change (lengthen) the frequency of the location so that invisibility in the root is eliminated?


      Unreal. Have to apply wavelengths commensurate with the size of the aircraft. 5-20 meters. Then the question will arise of the accuracy of direction finding. Except as a synthesized aperture it cannot be solved. For a general warning (supposedly, a warrior flies, over there) is enough. But the fighters (at least the modern ones available) cannot be used by fighters.
      Yes, and do not go this way. They simply compensate for the small ESR of the enemy with greater power and the LPC of the airborne locator of the AWACS aircraft. But a head start
      The F-35 has already been made for myself. If everything were simple, the Chinese, ours, and now the Japanese with the Europeans would not bother with "invisible".
      1. Corn
        Corn 14 June 2019 16: 25
        0
        And if you use a range with a millimeter wavelength?
        After all, the attenuation should not be so strong in normal weather conditions?
        1. dauria
          dauria 14 June 2019 16: 40
          0
          And if you use a range with a millimeter wavelength?


          What's the point? EPR will not increase. and an increase in the distance from a narrower beam (a larger directivity gain) will be consumed by attenuation in the atmosphere. God forbid the rain - generally blind.
          In the millimeter range, 2 transparency windows - 8 mm and 3 mm
          And they use them where there is nowhere to go - when, with small antenna sizes, you need to get a narrow beam. However, the range of 8 mm was also used here. Radar "Orion" on the Su-24. Microplane mode. But this is for a high definition view of the ground, and it is in addition to 3 cm.
          Yes, and another problem climbs out, purely technological. In the PAR array, the elements should be located at a distance less than half the wavelength. Even modules in the 3 cm range have to be located in several floors (layers). And heat with their low efficiency can be removed as if from a laptop by evaporative tubes.
          1. Corn
            Corn 14 June 2019 17: 22
            0
            EPR will not increase.
            are you sure? Of course, I’m not at all special in this area, but many other sources write that from 12 GHz and higher the efficiency of stealth technologies is catastrophically falling.
            Even modules in the 3 cm range have to be located in several floors (layers). And heat with their low efficiency can be removed as if from a laptop by evaporative tubes.
            These are already production problems, the accuracy of modern machines and is not close to what it was 20 years ago. For simplicity, cooling can generally be made liquid.
            God forbid the rain - generally blind.
            so much better than nothing at all.
            In the PAR array, the elements should be located at a distance less than half the wavelength.
            Really? Why then only talk about the diversity of the transceiver modules throughout the aircraft?
            1. dauria
              dauria 14 June 2019 18: 39
              0
              are you sure? Of course, I’m not at all special in this area, but many other sources write that from 12 GHz and higher the efficiency of stealth technologies is catastrophically falling.


              Let them write. For this, surface defects (cracks, level differences in panels, surface roughness) should be comparable with the wavelength. At the same time, take a look at the clearance standards for the F-35. By the way, this is not a weak technological problem came out for us, and for the Chinese.
              And even less than 3 mm range will not be used anyway. That's why

              3cm - 9 GHz
              3 mm -90 GHz - second transparency window (between oxygen)
              attenuation will more than gobble up your gain in KND
              Really? Why then only talk about the diversity of the transceiver modules throughout the aircraft?

              Imagine yes. Here is an example of the appearance of the second diffraction lobe in the antenna pattern at a distance greater than half the wavelength, even with a slight "swing" of the beam.


              and the modules are yes, they are delivering. But for other purposes. A sideways, backward overview of the synthesized (virtual) antennas, electronic warfare and a bunch of side things that are now hanging on the locator. The attitude is indirect, and does not compensate for the small ESR of the target.
              Believe me, finally, a simple thing - the Americans started with the F-117, but they were too smart, they sacrificed everything to stealth. Then they found a compromise. And the most foul - if it weren’t for Gorbach, the same plane would be with us. They didn’t come up with anything new, we just stopped generally move, They divided the whole country, to whom the piece is fatter.
              1. Corn
                Corn 14 June 2019 18: 58
                0
                Thank you for the clarification.
                But is there really no way against this scrap, besides another scrap?
                For example, lidars are generally put on satellites to scan the earth, can they even detect an airplane?
                1. dauria
                  dauria 14 June 2019 19: 16
                  0
                  But is there really no way against this scrap, besides another scrap?

                  Come on ... It's not a scrap, but so .... And not "invisible". They reduced the ESR by 10 times, more is already unrealistic. From 3 square meters to 0,3 square meters. This gave them a head start of about 1,5 times in range (the fourth root of 10) That is, it was 150 km, it became 100 km.
                  And we don’t stand. We’ll do the drying, the air defense also seems to have power, and the CPV has increased, it’s easier on earth. Just a new round of the race, the main thing is not to sleep. Commanders would be sensible to us, then we will break through.
  4. Saboteur Holuy
    Saboteur Holuy 14 June 2019 14: 43
    0
    It’s useless for China to fight at sea and in the air with the USA, with no chance, but it won’t get on land
    1. AUL
      AUL 14 June 2019 15: 18
      +2
      Quote: Diversant Holuy
      China is useless to fight at sea and in the air with the USA, with no chance

      Not at all a fact!
    2. vostok68
      vostok68 15 June 2019 05: 05
      -1
      Are you really about. Have you been Russian? I myself served in Rybachy in Kamchatka urgently, there I saw the inscriptions painted with water over the waterline applied by the guys from the Russian
  5. rocket757
    rocket757 14 June 2019 15: 09
    -1
    Wanting is not harmful ... will they be able ???
  6. yehat
    yehat 14 June 2019 15: 18
    0
    Quote: SSEDM
    location power

    deck aircraft have severe power limitations. This is not a promising option.
  7. yehat
    yehat 14 June 2019 15: 20
    0
    Quote: Saboteur Holuay
    China is useless to fight at sea and in the air with the USA

    if that were the case, Trump would have acted differently in China.
    With all the problems of China's backwardness, it is far from easy prey.
  8. yehat
    yehat 14 June 2019 15: 45
    -1
    Quote: dauria
    Will have to apply wavelengths commensurate

    and varying frequencies in a narrow range does not increase the possibility of detection?
    In EW, this is used.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 June 2019 16: 58
      +3
      The shorter the wave, the easier it is to absorb the stealth coating.
      Therefore, the millimeter range is not a panacea.
      Stealth is provided by 2 factors: waves or are reflected in the parties,
      or absorbed by special coating.
      From here a paradox arises: a huge airplane radar sees how
      insect.
      That does not fit into the brains of people who are accustomed to the ordinary:
      the larger the item, the better visible.
      They try to fight stealth with combinations of meter, decimeter,
      and centimeter radars, plus optical methods. If all data is run
      in the computer, the correct software will try to "draw" the stealth plane.
      But the air defense becomes so complicated that stealth overtakes it in
      price-performance ratio.
      1. Town Hall
        Town Hall 14 June 2019 17: 09
        +3
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Hence the paradox:

        The paradox is that long waves can "see" airplanes .. but they cannot provide target designation to missiles. And seeker missiles operate in small wave ranges .. in which airplanes are practically invisible. A closed circle.
        Absolutely right about the price / quality. It reached the point of absurdity that the S-400 air defense system costs 2,5-3 yards of dollars. This is the cost of 30/40 f-35. And never 1 anti-aircraft air defense system can stop such an armada of aircraft.
      2. SETSET
        SETSET 16 June 2019 01: 10
        -1
        voyaka uh (Alexey), do not write fairy tales about stealth from Western advertising sites! And learn to distinguish the length of the um wave from the frequency range (waves). Impossible to make an absorbent coating broadband and that's it. You can only reduce to a certain limit the plane’s image intensifier, but not to the one described by Lockheed Martin specialists, deliberately for advertising purposes, replacing the average image intensifier parameter with the minimum image intensifier parameter under ideal conditions ... Learn the materiel and do not rewrite stupidity.
        Quote: voyaka uh
        From here a paradox arises: a huge airplane radar sees how
        insect.

        There cannot be an average EOP of F-22 equal to 0,0001 sq. m or 1 sq. cm (Hornet EOP) - this is nonsense, and the average F-35 image intensifier is 0,005 square meters. m or 50 square meters. see (EOP crows) - nonsense.

        The average F-22 image intensifier is 0,3-0,4 square meters. meter and F-35 EOP = 0,4 - 0,5 square meters. meter.

        Quote: voyaka uh
        But the air defense becomes so complicated that stealth overtakes it in
        price-performance ratio.

        You are mistaken, the price is not in favor of stealth aircraft, but in favor of air defense systems. And in view of the use of layered network-centric air defense - the F-35 has no chance ...
  9. Piramidon
    Piramidon 14 June 2019 17: 00
    0
    China wants to detect F-35 using deck versions of upgraded An-24

    Something the authors "twirled the plot." You might think that a deck version of the An-24 has been created. request
  10. yehat
    yehat 14 June 2019 17: 05
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Stealth is provided by 2 factors: waves or are reflected in the parties,
    or absorbed by special coating.

    and the interference from AFAR irradiation does not give a chance to simply understand that there is something "here"
    let not dimensions, but simply coordinates
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 June 2019 21: 32
      0
      It is possible to understand that "something is". But this is not enough.
      This "something" needs to be brought down. Launch a lot of very expensive missiles
      "carpet method" into this "something"? - maybe one will hit at random?
      - missiles do not get caught. And exactly - it’s impossible. Not a centimeter radar
      complexes, nor millimeter-wave radars of GOS missiles - stealth clearly do not see
      at distances when you need to repel the attack. Cannot capture target.
      And when they capture, the stealth already shot themselves. Or hitting yourself
      a complex, or an object that the complex covers.
      The Chinese recognize the problem and are looking for ways to solve it.
      1. himRa
        himRa 14 June 2019 23: 31
        -1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        It is possible to understand that "something is". But this is not enough.
        This "something" needs to be brought down.

        I certainly understand why you insist on f35 and stealth technologies ..... probably a Jew flying on such an apparatus feels like a god .... until the first capture and escort laughing
        in addition to radio waves and interference phenomena, there are optical systems such as lidar .... and in the complex gives an unambiguous signature of the object ...
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 14 June 2019 23: 39
          0
          But I wrote about this above: a complex of systems is capable of detecting stealth.
          Only here all these systems together are much higher in price themselves
          stealth. This is the point: passive air defense, much more expensive and complex than
          active means of attacking him.
          1. himRa
            himRa 14 June 2019 23: 49
            -1
            Russian S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems were cheaper than similar American systems and at the same time exceeded the best US system - THAAD. This was told by CNBC with reference to informed sources.

            According to the channel, the Russian system currently costs about $ 500 million. At the same time, the American Patriot Pac-2 and THAAD batteries cost $ 2 billion and $ 3 billion, respectively, RIA Novosti writes.

            the calculation can accompany 10 and shell them with 20 missiles, if you take the probability of 50%, then the stealth will not stock up ...
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 15 June 2019 00: 51
              0
              Reread the previous few posts. Even in combination with bulky
              meter range radar, which has to be attached to the S-400
              especially because of stealth, all that the S-400 complex can do is detect stealth
              as "something" hostile that is approaching. Parse what and take it
              "Something" as a target is not capable of escorting. Except if
              stealth inadvertently approaches "point-blank" - for 2-3 tens of kilometers.
              Then the optics of the complex will be able to take it as a target and shoot a rocket.
              This is understood by the Chinese (about this article), but many participants in the discussion do not understand.
              I’ll clarify that American air defense systems have exactly the same problems
              in stealth interception.
              1. vostok68
                vostok68 15 June 2019 05: 35
                0
                "Reread the previous few posts. Even when combined with a cumbersome
                meter range radar, which has to be attached to the S-400
                especially because of stealth, all that the S-400 complex can do is detect stealth
                as "something" hostile that is approaching. Parse what and take it
                "Something" as a target for accompaniment, the complex is not capable of "- you should not write about what you do not understand
              2. SETSET
                SETSET 16 June 2019 02: 00
                -1
                voyaka uh (Alexey), horror, complete illiteracy and deliberate distortion of the characteristics of the S-400 in favor of the F-35I. Everything is better with the "unchosen by God" than with others ... An illiterate strategist, teach materiel and do not write nonsense.



                Surveillance Radar S-400 detects F-35 at a distance of D = 314 km in free space and destroys further, and the N036 Belka Su-57 radar at a distance of 296,3 km and the N035 Irbis Su-35S radar at D = 225 km in free space ...
              3. karabass
                karabass 16 June 2019 14: 27
                -1
                Wait how it sees maybe it won’t be able to hit? But what about the old air defense tube systems on meter radars that shot down planes?
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 16 June 2019 14: 33
                  +1
                  So these aircraft had an EPR
                  10 -15 m2
                  These are F-4, F-15, Su-27, F-16, MiG-29.
                  These lamp complexes can be knocked down now.
                  When the EPR of the aircraft dropped to 0.1 - 0.001 m2, the air defense system of the air defense crew ended. It’s necessary to cast off on a combination of different radars, optics, wound software ...
                  1. SETSET
                    SETSET 16 June 2019 14: 41
                    -1
                    voyaka uh (Alexey), as always consciously write fairy tales from Lockheed - Martin advertising sites.
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    When the EPR of the aircraft dropped to 0.1 - 0.001 m2, the air defense system of the air defense crew ended.

                    The average image intensifier tube (EPR) F-22 is 0,3-0,4 square meters. meter and F-35 EOP (EPR) = 0,4 - 0,5 square meters. meter.
                    Learn the materiel. And learn what is the difference between the amplification of lamps from semiconductors, so as not to write nonsense.
          2. vostok68
            vostok68 15 June 2019 05: 27
            0
            "Only now all these systems together are much more expensive than
            stealth "Ha-ha-ha! I understand that you are traders, but you need to know when to stop, you have to think that you are writing
      2. SETSET
        SETSET 16 June 2019 01: 40
        -1
        voyaka uh (Alexey), as always true! Learn the materiel!
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Not a centimeter radar
        complexes, nor millimeter-wave radars of GOS missiles - stealth clearly do not see
        at distances when you need to repel the attack. Cannot capture target.
        And when they capture, the stealth already shot themselves. Or hitting yourself
        a complex, or an object that the complex covers.

        The S-400 surveillance radar detects the F-35 at a distance of D = 314 km in free space and destroys further, and the N036 Belka Su-57 radar at a distance of 296,3 km and the N035 Irbis Su-35S radar at D = 225 km in free space .... And with the use of missiles with ARGSN 40N6 - the F-35 has no chances at all ... The Chinese need an AWACS aircraft for aircraft carriers in order to push as far as possible the launch line of F-35 cruise missiles air - a surface such as Storm Shadow and AGM-158 JASSM missiles and etc., from AUG.
  11. Eliyorbeck
    Eliyorbeck 14 June 2019 18: 05
    +1
    Maybe they will succeed. Let's see.
  12. yehat
    yehat 17 June 2019 09: 24
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Gos missiles - stealth clearly not see
    at distances when you need to repel the attack. Cannot capture target.

    so it's about another. It is important that the reaction begins to level the stealth advantage at the beginning of the event. Most rockets in the vicinity are quite capable of detecting stealth, often you only need to launch them in time in the right square. And all that is needed is to debug the target designation algorithm using atypical inputs.
    so personally, it seems to me, this can to some extent solve the problem,
    but there is one thing but - AFAR is still far from being used everywhere.