"Too heavy": The new aircraft AWACS KJ-600 was declared unable to take off from the existing aircraft carriers of the PLA Navy

46
"Too heavy": The new aircraft AWACS KJ-600 was declared unable to take off from the existing aircraft carriers of the PLA Navy

The newest Chinese carrier-based early warning radar (AWACS) aircraft KJ-600, developed for the PLA Navy, is not adapted for takeoff from the Chinese fleet aircraft carriers. It is reported by Defense World with reference to China Central Television (CCTV).

The publication draws attention to the statements of Chinese military experts following the next successful flight test of the KJ-600, conducted on February 21. According to experts, the aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong, which are part of the PLA Navy, are equipped with a springboard for aircraft take-off, which excludes the basing of an AWACS aircraft on board these ships.



It is noted that the "flying radar" KJ-600 is "too heavy" to make an independent takeoff using the aircraft carrier's springboard, and there are no catapults on this type of ships. As an example, similar American carrier-based AWACS aircraft of the E-2 Hawkeye type based on the US Navy aircraft carriers are cited.

The deck of an aircraft carrier is too short for such a heavy aircraft to take off only with the help of a springboard and the thrust of its own engines

- said the military expert Song Jian.

According to the conclusions of experts, the new carrier-based aircraft KJ-600 can only be based on the next generation aircraft carrier, which is already under construction. According to reports, the new ship will be equipped with an electromagnetic catapult.

The program for creating a special AWACS KJ-600 aircraft was launched in the early 2000s along with the development program for the aircraft carrier fleet of China, but the aircraft made its first flight only in August 2020. According to the Chinese military, the KJ-600's "flying radar" is capable of detecting American stealth aircraft.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    46 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +6
      26 February 2021 09: 13
      the aircraft is not heavy, and the existing aircraft carriers are not suitable for launching this type of aircraft.
      well, that's understandable.
      the latest aircraft and is being sharpened for the latest aircraft carrier
      1. 0
        26 February 2021 09: 39
        https://topwar.ru/174675-samolet-drlo-xian-kj-600-dlja-vms-noak.html
      2. 0
        26 February 2021 13: 08
        Is the glass half empty or full?
    2. -7
      26 February 2021 09: 15
      Heavy, not heavy, but the Chinese have it.
      Take off empty, refuel in the air, business.
      1. +2
        26 February 2021 09: 25
        From whom will he refuel in the air in the middle of the ocean?
        1. -4
          26 February 2021 09: 31
          From the tanker.
          1. -1
            26 February 2021 09: 38
            Where can you get a tanker in the middle of the ocean?
            1. -3
              26 February 2021 09: 44
              In the same place as for the Russian TU-160.
              And also, in extreme cases, a fighter taking off from an aircraft carrier can be equipped with refueling equipment.
            2. +5
              26 February 2021 10: 31
              will do on floats, and will carry it like that)))
              tap on the water - and let it take off.
              And if it's no joke, then after working out the equipment, the Chinese will not have difficulty making a UAV with radar functions, but it will already be much easier and will take off from any sane take-off site.
              1. 0
                26 February 2021 18: 43
                Quote: yehat2
                it will not be difficult for the Chinese to make a UAV with radar functions

                And where will the UAV take so much energy to power these radars?)))
                If it was possible to make a compact UAV with the AWACS function, then it would have been done long ago, while no one has them)))
                1. +1
                  26 February 2021 20: 53
                  throw out the pilots with parachutes and get the UAV
                  and at the same time throw out the unnecessary volume and support systems for people.
                  here is the weight gain. And the radar and its energy remained.
                  What's so unreal about that?
    3. +5
      26 February 2021 09: 15
      People worked for the future. Everything is correct.
    4. +8
      26 February 2021 09: 22
      The program for creating a special AWACS KJ-600 aircraft was launched in the early 2000s along with the development program for the aircraft carrier fleet of China, but the aircraft made its first flight only in August 2020.

      And in the Russian Federation there are no problems with AWACS, there are no operating aircraft carriers and there are no problems.
      1. 0
        26 February 2021 13: 11
        Quote: Alex2048
        And in the Russian Federation there are no problems with AWACS, there are no operating aircraft carriers and there are no problems.

        managers are temporary workers, but there are plenty, they are ready to optimize everything in their pocket
    5. -2
      26 February 2021 09: 42
      The Chinese know better from the basement. lol
    6. +2
      26 February 2021 09: 47
      The question is in the Catapult .... But such a device will find application. And in Russia it is necessary to do this so as not to drive the A-50
      1. 0
        26 February 2021 18: 47
        Quote: Zaurbek
        The question is in the Catapult .... But such a device will find application. And in Russia it is necessary to do this so as not to drive the A-50

        So they already started, but the money ran out))) Yak-44 plane
        Despite the fact that many years have passed since the termination of work on the Yak-44 aircraft, it still has not lost its relevance and remains the only RLDN aircraft in the world capable of operating from aircraft carriers equipped with take-off ramps. Therefore, the Yak-44E aircraft and its variants are still competitive in their class both on the domestic and foreign markets.
      2. 0
        26 February 2021 19: 02
        In the Russian Federation and the A-50 on the fingers to count, even Soviet-built only 50 pieces were modernized to the A-6U. ... A-100 has been quiet for several years now. They said that instead of the Il-76MD90A base they were using Tu-214 ... and again there was silence.
        Where to build deck AWACS with such handlers?
        And there is no base for it - neither the Il-114, nor the Il-112 are suitable for this. And for the renewal of the Yak-44 there are no engines ... nothing.
        And there are no aircraft carriers either.
        Although for some theaters of a similar - a lighter and cheaper aircraft AWACS would have come just in time. In the same Syria would be just right.
        Soon we will buy everything from China, both An-12 and An-2, and this KJ-600 is just an AWACS aircraft ... Serdyukov and Co. have already decided to optimize all aviation design bureaus.
    7. 0
      26 February 2021 09: 50
      Too heavy ": the new aircraft AWACS KJ-600 was declared unable to take off from the existing aircraft carriers of the PLA Navy

      And there is no way to lighten the aircraft structure using composites and expensive light alloys? After all, China can afford it. For their fleet, this plane is archival.
      1. +9
        26 February 2021 09: 57
        Quote: lucul
        And there is no way to lighten the aircraft structure using composites and expensive light alloys?

        No way. In order to take off from a springboard, the thrust-to-weight ratio must be done at the level of a high-speed fighter of the 4th generation, on AWACS it is unrealistic. That is, everything is real, but to the detriment of its own AWACS capabilities.
        The Chinese made it easier - they created an aircraft for ejection AB, which they are building. And the fact that they will not sit on the existing ones is a small loss.
        1. -2
          26 February 2021 10: 25
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          In order to take off from a springboard, the thrust-to-weight ratio must be at the level of a high-speed fighter of the 4th generation, ...

          The Su-25UTG does not seem to have such a thrust-to-weight ratio, but it takes off quite confidently from Kuznetsov.
          1. +4
            26 February 2021 11: 53
            Quote: Kurare
            The Su-25UTG does not seem to have such a thrust-to-weight ratio, but it takes off quite confidently from Kuznetsov.

            I agree. But there were some peculiarities, despite the fact that the thrust-to-weight ratio of the UTG is still higher than the same Hokai.
            1. 0
              26 February 2021 15: 42
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              But there were some peculiarities, despite the fact that the thrust-to-weight ratio of the UTG is still higher than the same Hokai.

              This is what I meant, the thrust-to-weight ratio of the UTG is far from the 4th generation fighters. Those. not only thrust-to-weight ratio plays a role, but also aerodynamics, lift-off speed, etc.

              I'm exaggerating a little, but the same An-2, I think, could take off from Kuznetsov without any problems. Those. it depends on many factors whether it will take off or not. If memory serves, at one time the Yak-44 was very close to taking off exactly without a catapult from the Kuznetsov deck, since it was originally designed for this. I don’t know what they donated for this.
              1. 0
                26 February 2021 19: 05
                Quote: Kurare
                I don’t know what they donated for this.

                Just very powerful engines. These are on the An-70.
        2. 0
          26 February 2021 11: 48
          What about the good old Jet Launch Boosters?
          1. +2
            26 February 2021 11: 54
            Quote: alexmach
            What about the good old Jet Launch Boosters?

            They are unkind :)))) The ashes of the "Challenger" are knocking on our hearts :)))))
        3. +1
          26 February 2021 11: 57
          In order to take off from a springboard, the thrust-to-weight ratio must be at the level of a high-speed fighter of the 4th generation

          I did not know that the A6M Zero had a thrust-to-weight ratio at the level of 4th generation fighters.))))
          The propeller-driven aircraft of the Second World War took off from the deck of an aircraft carrier without any problems, and they did not need the thrust of the 4th generation fighters, but it was enough to have a low specific wing loading, and that's it. )))
          1. +2
            26 February 2021 12: 19
            Quote: lucul
            I did not know that the A6M Zero had a thrust-to-weight ratio at the level of 4th generation fighters.))))

            What, they took off from the springboard?
            Quote: lucul
            The propeller-driven aircraft of the Second World War took off from the deck of an aircraft carrier without any problems, and they did not need the thrust of the 4th generation fighters, but it was enough to have a low specific wing loading, and that's it. )))

            And why was it said? Are you going to provide AWACS with wing loading at the "Zero" level? Zero had about 104 kg per m2. To provide such an E-2C (normal takeoff is usually not indicated, but within 20-21 tons), all you need is a wing with an area of ​​191 - 205 squares, while it has 65,03. Good luck :)))
            1. +1
              26 February 2021 12: 54
              And why was it said?

              Indeed. ))))
              Zero had about 104 kg per m2. To provide such an E-2C (normal takeoff is usually not indicated, but within 20-21 tons), all you need is a wing with an area of ​​191 - 205 squares, while it has 65,03. Good luck :)))

              Specific wing loading is the ratio of the mass of an aircraft to the area of ​​its wings. In the case of basing the aircraft on an aircraft carrier, there will be restrictions on the wing area. In this case, only the mass of the aircraft is a possible variable parameter, which I said right away.
              An AWACS propeller aircraft weighing 20 tons was initially too heavy for its tasks, and if the Americans did not bother with weight, having catapults, then for China, weight reduction is the main priority. The same Zero had a practical range of 3 km, which the same Hawkeye does not have.
              Therefore, for China, it is only a reduction in the mass of the aircraft, through the use of expensive light alloys in the design. Otherwise, the aircraft carriers "Liaoning" and "Shandong" will remain incapable of combat without their own AWACS aircraft)))
              1. +2
                26 February 2021 13: 05
                Quote: lucul
                An AWACS propeller aircraft weighing 20 tons was initially too heavy for its tasks, and if the Americans did not bother with weight, having catapults, then for China, weight reduction is the main priority.

                The opposite is true. Propeller-driven aircraft AWACS with a mass of 20 tons is just needed in order to fully solve AWACS tasks in the air. Therefore, the main priority for the Chinese is not an attempt to cross a snake and a hedgehog, with the obvious result in the form of a meter of barbed wire, but to create a normal AWACS aircraft + ejection carriers. Which is what they do.
                Quote: lucul
                Otherwise, the aircraft carriers "Liaoning" and "Shandong" will remain incapable of combat without their own AWACS aircraft)))

                Firstly, no one bothers them to act in tandem with the ejection AV. Secondly, these two aircraft carriers can work quite effectively in the near sea zone, relying on ground-based AWACS and MRA. In general, they are not in danger of being incapacitated :)))
                1. 0
                  26 February 2021 13: 08
                  First, no one bothers them to act in tandem with the ejection AV. Secondly, these two aircraft carriers can work quite effectively in the near sea zone, relying on ground-based AWACS and MRA. In general, they are not in danger of being incapacitated.

                  Yes ? And if tomorrow is a war, and catapul carriers will still enter service only after 5 years? ))))
                  Therefore, only weight loss, there are simply no other options)))
                  1. -1
                    26 February 2021 13: 17
                    Quote: lucul
                    Yes ? And if tomorrow is a war, and catapul carriers will still enter service only after 5 years? ))))

                    And if tomorrow is a war, they will fight with what they have.
                    Quote: lucul
                    Therefore, only weight loss, there are simply no other options)))

                    Yes, because if you follow the path suggested by you, the fleet will not receive sane AWACS either tomorrow or in 5 years.
                    1. 0
                      26 February 2021 13: 26
                      Yes, because if you follow the path suggested by you, the fleet will not receive sane AWACS either tomorrow or in 5 years.

                      Aircraft always have reserves of weight reduction - it's just a matter of the price of construction materials)))
                      1. +1
                        26 February 2021 13: 29
                        Quote: lucul
                        Aircraft always have reserves of weight reduction - it's just a matter of the price of construction materials)))

                        Uh-huh. Only now they are very limited, these reserves. And the weight of the aircraft will not be reduced by tens of percent from the word "in any way." There is equipment, there are people, there are necessary reserves of fuel, etc., which, in principle, cannot be solved by the same composites, etc.
                      2. 0
                        26 February 2021 19: 19
                        Quote: lucul
                        Aircraft always have reserves of weight reduction

                        Do not forget that this aircraft is deck-based, which means that the requirements for the strength and reliability of the landing gear and the airframe, as well as the structural strength in general, are higher than those of the land-based counterpart.
                        And do not worry about the first two springboard aircraft carriers in China, they will not remain without AWACS - they have AWACS helicopters supplied by the Russian Federation (like India) in sufficient quantity for this.
                        In addition, these springboard aircraft carriers are not planning to be used in the oceanic zone, and in the DMZ and BMZ, among other things, they will be able to support the base AWACS aircraft (on the An-12 glider).
                        All other aircraft carriers from China will have catapults. And the KJ-600 will be ready no earlier than the first ejection AV of China will go into running gear. Everything is synchronized with them - the planned economy and the leadership of the CPC.
      2. 0
        26 February 2021 10: 15
        Quote: lucul
        And there is no way to lighten the aircraft structure using composites and expensive light alloys
        There, and the antenna can break off / shift, all the same, the kick will be directed upward during takeoff with a springboard.
    8. +4
      26 February 2021 10: 13
      "Too heavy"
      And what is so impossible?
      1. +3
        26 February 2021 10: 29
        Quote: Trapp1st
        And what is so impossible?

        Can. But this option is not suitable for everyday work - it turns out very expensive! Powder boosters are expensive, disposable items.
      2. mvg
        -1
        27 February 2021 23: 00
        And what is so impossible?

        Avik has million liters of fuel ... three train trains. not the best option for space flight.
    9. +6
      26 February 2021 10: 28
      This is an American AWACS aircraft E-2C Hawkeye

      This is the Xian KJ-600 AWACS aircraft

      What's the difference?
      You look quickly and you can't tell
      1. +4
        26 February 2021 10: 30
        You look quickly and you can't tell
        Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V ...
      2. +1
        26 February 2021 10: 45
        The Chinese have roots - An-24
        1. +1
          26 February 2021 12: 00
          No, on the Chinese analogue of the An-24, they only worked out the radar. The KJ-600 itself is built from scratch.
    10. +1
      26 February 2021 10: 40
      rocket boosters let them put
    11. +2
      26 February 2021 11: 56
      Quote: El Dorado
      Where can you get a tanker in the middle of the ocean?


      Admiral on the parade ground:
      Cadet Ivanov, get out of line.
      Attack from the right on the course of two US destroyers.
      Your actions?
      Both cruisers - main battery salvo!
      And where did you get two cruisers on the parade ground?
      There are two destroyers where you are, admiral!
    12. Hog
      0
      26 February 2021 13: 04
      Solid fuel boosters.

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"