KJ-600 carrierborne AEWC thread

[asif iqbal]

The numbers built will depend on how many carriers China plans to build

KJ-600 AWACS even if they build 12 units would have served it purpose

because to ensure carrier protection nothings beats a fixed wing AWACS

just shows you how serious China is taking the carrier plan

 

[Deino]

Allegedly another image - from what I know, the third - of the XAC KJ-600 during its so far unconfirmed maiden flight on 29. August.

(Image via @中导绝响 at the lt.cjdby.net-Forum)

 

[taxiya]

Considering the powerplant for 600 is same as 500 due to similar airframe, it wouldn't be any different incase of taking off from land.
Its just that the body and landing gear will be strengthened to deal with catapult and arrested recovery jerk/acceleration requirements.

But KJ-500 has four engines and is based on Y-9(8F), while KJ-600 has only two engines and is smaller than Y-7.

The differences make it difficult to compare the two regarding take-off distance on land.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Well knowing the gross weight you can calculate the take off distance using calculator

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Using gross weight of 11000 lb , Headwind of 10 knots, temp at 30 deg C, barometric pressure of 1000mba I came with roughly 700 m which match the data bellow without catapult

Using E2 as bench mark look like 700 m up to 15 m

 

[taxiya]

Well knowing the gross weight you can calculate the take off distance using calculator

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Using gross weight of 11000 lb , Headwind of 10 knots, temp at 30 deg C, barometric pressure of 1000mba I came with roughly 700 m which match the data bellow without catapult

Using E2 as bench mark look like 700 m up to 15 m
View attachment 62998

No offence, but how can you use that web site which is dedicated to Cessna 172N to calculate other aircrafts? Different aircraft has different wing shape, size, cross-section of airfoil, dimension of fuselage and takeoff weight. All these matters, E2's data fitting does not make using Cessna formula any more trustworthy.

 

[Intrepid]

Well knowing the gross weight you can calculate the take off distance using calculator ...

... you are not serious now, are you kidding?

 

[Hendrik_2000]

No offence, but how can you use that web site which is dedicated to Cessna 172N to calculate other aircrafts? Different aircraft has different wing shape, size, cross-section of airfoil, dimension of fuselage and takeoff weight. All these matters, E2's data fitting does not make using Cessna formula any more trustworthy.

It does not really matter whether Chessna or Boeing 737 It all work on Aerodynamic and physic here is theory behind it. BTW I foun dit because I am fascinated by AN2 turn out AN2 has the same GW of 11000 lb and can take off from 700m concrete field or less. It is biplane as such has double wing to lift off ideal as STOL. AN2 need minimal ground support as it has fuel pump inside the plane all you need is fuel drum. And has automatic mechanical slate to prevent stall Cheap it only $30,000 USD Still produced in China and Poland
Anyway that is why I include official E2 take of distance of 783 from FAS website as a check

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Intrepid]

... because I am fascinated by AN2 turn out AN2 has the same GW of 11000 lb and can take off from 700m concrete field or less.

I have 800 hours and 2.000 landings on AN-2 ... it's been more than 15 years since I last flown it and I don't have a manual on hand ... but as I remember, there must be less than 300 meters to take off and land for a fully loaded aircraft. If the tanks are almost empty and there are no passengers on board, 150 meters is enough.


The two AN-2, I have flown.

 

[taxiya]

It does not really matter whether Chessna or Boeing 737 It all work on Aerodynamic and physic here is theory behind it. BTW I foun dit because I am fascinated by AN2 turn out AN2 has the same GW of 11000 lb and can take off from 700m concrete field or less. It is biplane as such has double wing to lift off ideal as STOL. AN2 need minimal ground support as it has fuel pump inside the plane all you need is fuel drum. And has automatic mechanical slate to prevent stall Cheap it only $30,000 USD Still produced in China and Poland
Anyway that is why I include official E2 take of distance of 783 from FAS website as a check

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Seriously?

Why don't you read the whole set of articles in the program

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?

Can you point where in the takeoff&landing.pdf says that other properties of the aircraft in question such as airfoil geometry do not play important role in calculating the take-off distance?

Yes Cessna and Boeing 737 all work on aerodynamic physics. Precisely because of that, the properties that I said earlier matter greatly on their performance including take-off distance. But it seems that you have reached a self-contradicting conclusion that aerodynamic properties do not matter in one of the aerodynamic performance of an aircraft.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Seriously?

Why don't you read the whole set of articles in the program

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?

Can you point where in the takeoff&landing.pdf says that other properties of the aircraft in question such as airfoil geometry do not play important role in calculating the take-off distance?

Yes Cessna and Boeing 737 all work on aerodynamic physics. Precisely because of that, the properties that I said earlier matter greatly on their performance including take-off distance. But it seems that you have reached a self-contradicting conclusion that aerodynamic properties do not matter in one of the aerodynamic performance of an aircraft.

Airfoil geometry as Cl does not matter but yes the formula take account of wing area as S given in ft square Ok in AN2 I got it wrong because it is biplane I calculate 700 based on single wing So intepid estimate could be right 350.Look at the example

Required Datas
An aircraft weighs 30,000 lbs, has a wing area of 750 ft2, and a= 2.2. The runwayfriction coefficients are,:= 0.02 for rolling, and:b= 0.5 during braking. The touchdownvelocity is, and braking occurs when the airspeed is. Additionally,at touchdown speed,