Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Kawasaki C-2 as A-400 Alternatives ?

This is a discussion on Kawasaki C-2 as A-400 Alternatives ? within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old April 12th, 2010   #1
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,567
Threads:
Kawasaki C-2 as A-400 Alternatives ?

Quote:
From Japan Times:
GIFU (Kyodo) Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. delivered its first XC2 next-generation transport jet to the Air Self-Defense Force in a ceremony Tuesday at the firm's Gifu plant, two years behind schedule.

The XC2, a high-wing twin-engine plane measuring 44 meters in length, is currently the largest domestically developed aircraft.

The delivery was delayed because the fuselage turned out to be weaker than designed. The second plane is to be delivered by the end of March 2012.

The XC2's payload is about three times larger than the C1 transport now used by the ASDF.

The XC2 is easy to fly and can have civil aviation applications, a KHI official said.

The Maritime Self-Defense Force is developing the XP1 next-generation submarine patrol plane, which will use some common parts with the XC2.
Development costs for the two airplanes combined came to ¥345 billion.
Hi Guys, I know there's been a thread discussing Japan new Tarsnport the Kawasaki C-2, but try to find it, seems it's been inactive for sometime. So I try to put this thread on the new Kawasaki XC-2.

The idea that I would to ask, whether do you think C-2 will be a visible alternative in the world market for C-130J or the Planned further development of C 130 or even the A-400.

From what the Japan Times stated, KHI seems also try to market this in CIVILIAN Vertions. This seems KHI idea to try to marketed the aircraft but still circumspect the Japanese ban on selling military/lethal products abroad.

I personally do not have good knowledge on the extent of Japanese ban on exporting military products. However a Cargo plane like this can be viable to sell it under civilian regristartions, then converted back to military use.

For me it seems this plane provide viable alternative and can be a good choices for some nations that wants more than C-130 but can't afford C-17 or does not want a turboprop like A-400.
Provide them to world market will potentially push down the costs quite significantly then will made this viable for C-130 replacements or even alternatives from A-400.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010   #2
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
I'd say that its suitability as an A400M alternative depends on the degree of difference between the military version & the civilianised export version. If it's the same plane, but lacking defensive systems & painted a different colour, then no problem: the customers can fit defensive aids, military communications, etc. as wished, slap a new coat of paint on, & hey presto! Military transport!

It's similar in size & payload to A400M. Faster, which is good, but I don't know how its take off & landing performance compares. This is supposed to be where A400M is particularly good. Whether that is significant depends on customer priorities.

Any development of the C-130 is going to be in a different category, significantly smaller & lighter & with much smaller load-carrying capacity. The only way to give C-130 comparable performance would be to give it a new wing, new engines, & fatter fuselage - and that's a new aeroplane.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010   #3
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,567
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
I'd say that its suitability as an A400M alternative depends on the degree of difference between the military version & the civilianised export version. If it's the same plane, but lacking defensive systems & painted a different colour, then no problem: the customers can fit defensive aids, military communications, etc. as wished, slap a new coat of paint on, & hey presto! Military transport!
Swerve, I've got a articles on this plane on a japanese forum. Since it's in Japanese, i've a friend of mine tranlate it. Basically the articles says that the Kawasaki C-2 is C-17 little brother.
In sense it's share many C-17 aspects however with only two engines and about more than half of C-17 capacity. Does you or anybody else in this forum can confirm or have different oppinion on that article?

Looking on this plane seems for me it could be the answer many in the market are looking for a C-130 relacements. Agree the C-130 is reaching it's design apex. Lockheed paractically need to build another Aircraft if they want C-130 replacements.
Embraer try to introduces C-130 relacements, however it's still in drawing while this plane already entering final phase before production versions.
For me it's a handsome cargo plane with a lot potential to offer. Seems it's going to a shame if it's ended up like Kawasaki C-1 it's replaces. Just another 'only' Japanese build and operated cargo plane.

Japanese have capability to really offered and support the plane for World market. Just wandering if there's going to be significant support from Japanese government for KHI to do that..
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Kawasaki C-2.jpg (25.5 KB, 28 views)

Last edited by Ananda; April 12th, 2010 at 10:22 PM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2010   #4
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
The Embraer KC-390 is pretty well a direct C-130 replacement, with about the same payload. C-2 is much bigger, twice the payload. They're not really direct competitors.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2010   #5
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,567
Threads:
More Clearance for Japanese Transport to World Market ?

From Yomiuri Shimbun Editorial:http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/editorial/T100809003080.htm

Quote:
Japan could better exploit its defense technology
The Yomiuri Shimbun

Transfers of military technology--on a limited scale--could be an effective way to maintain the nation's vital defense technology while also supporting defense-related companies.

The Defense Ministry is studying a plan to transfer aircraft it developed to private use. The plan includes converting the Maritime Self-Defense Force's US-2 search-and-rescue seaplane to a firefighting flying boat and also converting the XC-2 next-generation transport plane now being developed by the Air Self-Defense Force to a large civilian cargo airplane.

The transfer of military technology to civilian use is unprecedented in this country. But search-and-rescue and transport planes are not really armaments in the first place. Adapting them for civilian use would have no effect on Japan's ideal as a "pacifist nation."

The government would be able to recoup some of its development costs by collecting usage fees from private companies. The procurement costs for Self-Defense Forces planes could also be reduced through the efficiencies of mass production. Manufacturers, for their part, could expect certain levels of earnings because the global demand for firefighting flying boats and cargo airplanes is large.
Kawasaki C-2 if the Japanese release it to World Market, I believe will have potentially huge impact in the market.
If the priced it correctly, well anybody we'll be delighted to have C-17 Baby Brother in more reasonable prices.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 26th, 2010   #6
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
Interesting find. Thanks for posting that.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8th, 2010   #7
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,473
Threads:
Update for Embraer KC-390. The aircraft design has been set, wind tunnel tests have been completed, and the cargo weight has been increased to 23.6 metric tons, 0r 26 short tons. Columbia has shown interests in buying 12, and Chile 6, with Brazil 28... Embraer hasn't decided upon the jet engine yet, outside the need for a engine of 27,000 pounds thrust...

Embraer’s Multinational KC-390 Tactical Air Transport Program
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9th, 2010   #8
Defense Enthusiast
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 309
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Update for Embraer KC-390. The aircraft design has been set, wind tunnel tests have been completed, and the cargo weight has been increased to 23.6 metric tons, 0r 26 short tons. Columbia has shown interests in buying 12, and Chile 6, with Brazil 28... Embraer hasn't decided upon the jet engine yet, outside the need for a engine of 27,000 pounds thrust...

Embraer’s Multinational KC-390 Tactical Air Transport Program
Nice A/C, pity its range is so short though. Range: 1,400 nmi (2,590 km). Rules it out as a C-130 replacement for those countries using it as their primary long range transport. Such as NZ which will be looking for a C-130 replacement in the next decade.
EnigmaNZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9th, 2010   #9
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
I'd like to see more details. I'm not sure what conditions that range is supposed to be under.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9th, 2010   #10
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant General
kato's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,988
Threads:
http://www.embraerdefensesystems.com...0_abril_09.pdf

has a chart for the range under various conditions. The 1,500 nm figure is with 19 tons payload (42,000 lbs).

For comparison with a C-130J, the official USAF figure is 1,600 nm maximum range with a 35,000 lbs payload, a C-130J-30 does 2,100 nm, older C-130E/H do 1,250-1,300 nm. With the same payload, according to the chart, the KC-390 ranges between 1,800 and 2,000 nm depending on flight profile.
kato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10th, 2010   #11
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
Thanks.

But - they've changed the predicted performance since that document was published last year. For example, it shows maximum payload as 19 tons, but Embraer has recently said that design studies show it will be 23 tons. I've not seen any estimates of range with that payload.

Last edited by swerve; September 10th, 2010 at 08:16 AM.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10th, 2010   #12
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,473
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
Thanks.

But - they've changed the predicted performance since that document was published last year. For example, it shows maximum payload as 19 tons, but Embraer has recently said that design studies show it will be 23 tons. I've not seen any estimates of range with that payload.
Here is tne new Embraer spec sheet... Notice the differences in range with the new specs...

http://www.embraerdefensesystems.com...unho_10_EN.pdf
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10th, 2010   #13
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,674
Threads:
Excellent! Thanks a lot.

That gives 16 tons (real ones, i.e. marginally more than 35000 lb) out to 2400 nautical miles in 'normal' operations, or 23.6 tons to 1350.
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2010   #14
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,567
Threads:
MTA or Embraer

From Financial Express:
Quote:
New Delhi: Ahead of the annual Indo-Russia summit in December, both countries have inked a $600-million (aprox Rs 2,900 crore) agreement for setting up a joint venture company to design and develop a multi-role transport aircraft.

The new aircraft is proposed to replace the 110 An-32 transport aircraft in India. The JV will be formed between Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and Russian partners: United Aircraft Corporation & Rosoboronexport to co-develop and produce Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA).

The development cost will be shared equally by both sides. The companies in the JV will manufacture 205 aircraft in 50:50 partnership. There is also scope for exporting the aircraft, both for civil and military use.

The $600-million JV was expected to be finalised during Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s visit to India in March, 2010 to develop MTA for Air Force of both countries to transport 18.5 tonne payloads over 2500 km. The expectation was belied and both sides continued to bargain hard during negotiations.

MTA is a 15-20 tonne payload capacity Aircraft which will meet the requirements of the Indian Air Force (IAF) and the Russian Air Force. The main features of MTA are: Maximum take-off weight 65 tonnes, Payload Capacity 15-20 tonnes, Cruise Speed 800 kmph, Range 2500-2700 km, Service ceiling 12 km. The aircraft will have two engines, state-of-the-art features such as fly-by-wire, full authority digital engine control, modern avionics and glass cockpit.



In 2001, the protocol on the commencement of work on the development of a joint multi-role four-engined turboprop transport aircraft IL-214 was signed between the two countries.

While working out details of the MTA project and harmonising requirements of both the countries, the project was significantly changed from the Il-214 baseline and increasing the aircraft’s payload capacity and cargo compartment dimensions. None of the engines currently manufactured in Russia can be applied to the new aircraft.

The decision on MTA’s full-scale launch was made in November 2007, when a special agreement between the countries’ was signed. This long-planned project will bring to life a next-generation tactical airlifter with maximum takeoff weight about 70 tonne and a payload capability of 20 tonne.

In March 2008, HAL clarified that the withdrawal of the Russian company, Irkutsk Aviation and Industrial Association as a partner from the $600-million, Indo-Russian MTA joint venture is an internal Russian affair and did not indicate a collapse of the project. Rosoboronexport, Russia’s state-owned monopoly liaison agency for the export and import.

(Financial Express)
Just wandering:

1. It will be direct competitor to Embrear program in replacing C-130. The Japanese C-2 more likely in the class of A-400. Which one (the MTA vs Embrear) that will be ready first in to the market ?
2. Heard the Russian still preparing twin engine jet versions of AN 70. This will be in direct competitors to A-400 and Kawasaki C-2 (if the Japanese finally release it to World market). Will the MTA really intended to replace AN-32 while the proposed twin jet engine AN 70 replacing IL-76 ? I just thought that the rasional way to keep Russia in the projects.

Also from Defence Aerospace:
Quote:
Defence Ministers of Portugal and Brazil Sign Memorandum of Understanding on the KC-390

Minister of National Defence Augusto Santos Silva, will today Friday, at 11:15 hours, host his Brazilian counterpart, Nelson Jobim, for a bilateral meeting.

The meeting between the ministers and their delegations will take place in Fort St. Julian of Barra, Oeiras.

Subsequently, at about 12:30, a ceremony will be held for the signature of a Declaration of Intent concerning the participation of Portugal in the KC-390 aircraft, after which the two ministers will be available to take questions from the media.

(Defense Aerospace)
Reallying only so far with relative low quantity transport usage countries like Portugal and her Latin Neighbours, could Embrear got enough momentum to have viable projects compared to MTA in which the initial order from Russia and India alone potentially out match any potential Order from Brazil, Portugal, and Latin Neighbourhood ?

Last edited by Ananda; September 12th, 2010 at 10:00 PM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2017   #15
Senior Member
Colonel
Ananda's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,567
Threads:
Potential 1st export customer for C2 ?

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Eco...ircraft-to-UAE

Sorry to bring back this old thread..but recent news seems make it relevant again..
Seems some talk with UAE as 1st export customer for C2. Again Japan now seems try harder to gain export customers for it's defence products.
Shinmaywa US-2 before gain some news with some talks with India and Indonesia, don't know the progress in India but in Indonesia seems it's competitor Be-200 that gain momentum.

Personally I like it more for Indonesia to approach C2 then A-400, which only gain some momentum due to Airbus close relationship with DI. The price of USD 170 mio + is also reasonable for that kind of capacity. Moreover the engine is available in large parts on commercial market..more plus sides compared to specialise engine of A-400, in term operational efficiency.

This can trully be C-17 little brother..hope more market opportunity for C2. The plane deserves it.

Last edited by Ananda; August 29th, 2017 at 12:07 AM.
Ananda is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:31 AM.