What's new

Chinese Air Force Gets Chinese C-130

Isn't this a copy of Antonov An-12 from late-1950s ?? India also used
to operate the An-12s until some years ago when they were retired/phased out.

The C-130J-30 of today is too superior to this Y-9 of yours.

The Y-9 has nothing to do with An-12, after all the specifications and technologies are different. And even if the Y-8, not Y-9, airframe was based on the An-12, that does not automatically place it a "copy" since the internal technologies impart the same level of differentiation both performance-wise and economic-wise.

And please do explain what the C-180J-30 or C-130H has that the Y-9 doesn't.

Whenever the Ukraine pleases.

You mean, whenever XAC pleases.
 
.
Isn't this a copy of Antonov An-12 from late-1950s ?? India also used
to operate the An-12s until some years ago when they were retired/phased out.

The C-130J-30 of today is too superior to this Y-9 of yours.


But still they built it within their country


A big achievement
 
.
But still they built it within their country


A big achievement

Not only we build within our country, we have freedom of design that the only limite is our imagination :D

transform chinese Y-9 into Kj-200s

27231375db63abb33b8871b.jpg
 
.
Don't even understand why you need to even call it the Chinese C130 when it has its own designation.

i think, this helps people instantly understand what it is, afterall the c-130 is pretty well known thus when someone says chinese c-130 we know that the role is similar
 
. . .
China Shanxi Y-9 Aircraft


d50735fae6cd7b89e27d67c00f2442a7d9330e5b.jpg


Source: Baidu Album

Your Baidu Album does not seem to be working.

All I see is a deleted image on the top and a picture of a sad crying child in
the second image. I think the Russians/Ukrainians must have given up the
designs of the An-12 to the crying Chinese child to keep him quiet, is that
China's trick of acquiring foreign ac designs?
 
. .
Not only we build within our country, we have freedom of design that the only limite is our imagination :D

transform chinese Y-9 into Kj-200s

27231375db63abb33b8871b.jpg

I think I'd prefer more reliable Embraer aircraft to be the platform
for our AEW&CS AESA radar -



I think the PLAAF has already managed to bring down a high-value AEW aircraft -

2006 People's Liberation Army Air Force KJ-200 crash

What ac was it really a KJ-200 or the much more precious KJ-2000?
 
.
@ Kiss od dragon

Wow read this -

Safety issues of the Chinese military modernization of the KJ-200 were brought to the Ukrainian Antonov aviation Design Bureau. In the process of modernization was replaced with a system to prevent icing and crew equipment early warning on emergency situations on board an aircraft. It is reported that measures have improved the reliability of the aircraft. In 2008 pictures of the Y-8 early-warning aircraft began to appear massively, one after another, on many domestic media. Pictures of the KJ-200 AEW Aircraft flying above Beijing for future air parade have displayed that Chinese Air Force has slightly improved the aerodynamic configuration of the tail control surfaces. The comparision of the pictures distinguished the newly-found vertical tails separately added on horizontal tail. Perhaps this improvement can provide stronger flight stability after the KJ-200 crash accident on 03 June 2006.

Kongjing-200 (KJ-200) | globalsecurity.org

It really doesn't appear Chinese have actually gotten the real know-how about the
aerodynamics of the Y-8/9. Whenever some problem crops up, you run to Ukraine!
If China really has the know-how of the aircraft, you should've been able to
modify the aircraft without consulting Ukraine.
 
.
Indian Defence News: JV with Tata may produce C-130J in India

If India sees a requirement for it, we may well produce the C130J Super Hercules
in-house in India. Tata shall also build in India whatever ac is selected to replace the
AVROs (most likely C-27J Spartan).

Another licence production deal. If India keeps signing license production deals you will never be able to create a truly domestic aviation industry. Production under licence deals simply means that most of the parts of the plane and certainly the most sophisticated components are made out side of India and are simply shipped and being assembled in side of India. While the technology transfers are at the minimal while the profits are all flowing outside of the country. Just look at the problems in the development of the HAL Tejas and the Kavari engines to see my point. Its one thing to build under licence with technology and support from other countries and a whole nother deal when you have to make something you're selfs from the ground up.
 
.
@ Kiss od dragon

Wow read this -



Kongjing-200 (KJ-200) | globalsecurity.org

It really doesn't appear Chinese have actually gotten the real know-how about the
aerodynamics of the Y-8/9. Whenever some problem crops up, you run to Ukraine!
If China really has the know-how of the aircraft, you should've been able to
modify the aircraft without consulting Ukraine.

Thats the Y-8 plane. What's you're source that either Ukraïne or Russia is involved with the Y-9 project ?
 
.
Thats the Y-8 plane. What's you're source that either Ukraïne or Russia is involved with the Y-9 project ?

Both Y-8 and Y-9 are aerodynamically copies of the Antonov An-12. China copied
the An-12 into the Y-8 many years ago, IF you really got the know-how about
its aerodynamics and design priniciples (which you should have if you consider the
plane indigenous), what's the need to take the aircraft to the Ukrainian Antonov
Design Bureau (which originally designed the An-12)??

When China put the AEW radar on top of Y-8 and made the KJ-200, it was
aerodynamically unstable, the Shaanxi guys did not know its design
principles, as a result, a KJ-200 crashed killing many crew. This is clean evidence
to show that the when Chinese "copy" something, you don't really "learn" into
it, you just blindly build it under a Chinese name!

It was only after the Antonov OKB in Kiev looked into the plane that they told
you that additional control fins on the tail are needed for adequate control
of the plane. Thats true knowledge, which is only achieved when you design
something from scratch and really conducted any R&D related to it.

The same happens with the Chinese Flanker copies, you had been building
the Su-27SK under the name J-11 for years, but still when you needed a carrier-based
variant, the Shenyang had no clue how to modify them, because they don't
have the background Intellectual Property of the design.

It was only after Ukraine again dropped in to help with a ready-made Su-33/T-10K
prototype that Shenyangs got to know where what should go and how to do it.

As of the foreign involvement in Y-9, its very certain that it too has received help
from Ukrainians but since its aerodynamically not much different than the Y-8
that you build, the foreign involvement could be lower. Its too early to say at this
point since the Y-9 is only now getting inducted.
 
.
Another licence production deal. If India keeps signing license production deals you will never be able to create a truly domestic aviation industry. Production under licence deals simply means that most of the parts of the plane and certainly the most sophisticated components are made out side of India and are simply shipped and being assembled in side of India. While the technology transfers are at the minimal while the profits are all flowing outside of the country. Just look at the problems in the development of the HAL Tejas and the Kavari engines to see my point. Its one thing to build under licence with technology and support from other countries and a whole nother deal when you have to make something you're selfs from the ground up.

The LCA project was started much before India really got any knowledge
from the ToT of Su-30MKI which came only in early 21st century. You
maybe surprised to know that the LCA is more Indian than J-10 is Chinese.

Same for Kaveri engine, it was started much before we recieved the tech of
the AL-31FP engines.

If we were to produce Su-30MKI and Rafale under Indian names, many would
be lured into believeing that we really designed them? The J-10 design is originally
Israeli. J-11 lives and breathes the Russian Flanker mark all over it.
 
.
The LCA project was started much before India really got any knowledge
from the ToT of Su-30MKI which came only in early 21st century. You
maybe surprised to know that the LCA is more Indian than J-10 is Chinese.

Same for Kaveri engine, it was started much before we recieved the tech of
the AL-31FP engines.

If we were to produce Su-30MKI and Rafale under Indian names, many would
be lured into believeing that we really designed them? The J-10 design is originally
Israeli. J-11 lives and breathes the Russian Flanker mark all over it.

LCA uses foreign weapons, inside French airframe, fitted with American engine & Israeli avionics. Even the J-11B that you mentioned uses completely indigenous technologies within its fuselage; in fact only the airframe design is what links it to the Flanker. Israel and China both denied the fact that the J-10 was based off the Lavi.

@ Kiss od dragon

Wow read this -



Kongjing-200 (KJ-200) | globalsecurity.org

It really doesn't appear Chinese have actually gotten the real know-how about the
aerodynamics of the Y-8/9. Whenever some problem crops up, you run to Ukraine!
If China really has the know-how of the aircraft, you should've been able to
modify the aircraft without consulting Ukraine.

If China didn't know the aircraft, it would have been flight tested in Ukraine instead of China. The fact that it is being flown in China says something different.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom