Kawasaki C-2
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
>Dimensions similiar to the Y-20/IL-76
>Only half the payload
Is the C-2 the worst modern transport plane ever conceived?
Seriously, 30 tons is basically what the smaller and lighter C-130 can carry.
Why is Japan's "High Tech" image so misleading?
>>30444854
but it's kawaii, op.
>>30444854
Modern Japanese aerospace has never been about results. Its been about keeping the industry alive and procuring domestically.
2 engines
35 ton payload
ability to operate off short runways
whats the problem
The price seems high but thats jap products for ya
>>30444854
You mean a 40 ton payload, which is comperable to the Y-20 and Il-76.
>>30445554
>IL-76
Payload: 42 tonnes (Il-76M), 48 tonnes (Il-76MD)
Introduction June 1974[1]
>>30445572
2 engine
vs 4 engine
>>30445572
I give you credit for not parroting the claimed Y-20 payload with engines that donot exist.
>>30445617
Y-20 will still carry around 50 tons.
Japan is shameful to lose against China, a newcomer.
But that's not really news, since the F-2 also sucked.
>>30445633
>same engines as the Il-76MD
>heavier than the Il-76MD
It cannot carry a heavier payload.
>>30445686
It isnt heavier, though.
And it has a lot of improvements over the IL-76MD, due to its super-critical wings, which the IL-76MD lacks.
>>30445686
Repeat after me:
JAPAN
LOST
AGAINST
CHINA
never before, it was so sweet to see the tears of self-proclaimed honorary aryans losing against "subhumans".
>>30445713
but stats say it's heavier, where does it say otherwise?
JAPAN HAS NO AEROSPACE
>>30445713
>20k lbs heavier by official stats
>not heavier
>muh wings
>same estimated payload with new engines as the modern Il-76 has with new engines
>>30445821
Still better than Japan's shit.
MADE IN CHINA
repeat after me
MADE IN CHINA
BETTER THAN JAPAN
>>30445834
>>30445733
How has Japan lost when you are compairing a 4 engined cargo plane to a 2 engined plane 2/3 of its size, yet there is less than a 10 ton difference in cargo capacity?
If anything it is an embarrassment for China.
I thought its range was specifically limited so that it would not be able to operate outside of Japanese air space otherwise it could be construed as an offensive weapon or enabling an offensive.
>>30445865
>C-130 payload in the size of a Y-20
Embarrassing.
Also, 2 engines means less redundancy. Military aircraft all ought to have at least 4.
>bragging that your brand new 4 engined cargo plane is on par with something from the 70's
>>30445899
>130k lbs plane is the same size as a 220k lbs plane
Claiming a C-130 can carry ~40 tons is a new one.
>>30445923
Ok, I was being lenient with comparing it to a 'superior quality aircraft' as used by their American masters.
Have some more hurt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70
Slav engineered turboprop:
>47,000 kg (103,620 lb) of cargo
TOPKEK
>>30445950
A 4 engined turboprop that carries more than China's brand new 4 engined jet? Ouch.
>>30445999
How do you know the Y-20's 'real payload'?
Grasping at straws, desperately.
At least we know the real payload of the C-2 and AN-70.
Nice try.
>>30445999
Nice try, but this is from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, who cooperated with China in the development of the Y-20. So, spare your 'chink propaganda'-retort.
>inb4 read the pic
It says that the dimensions arent confirmed. The payload is, though.
J A P A N
E M B A R R A S S I N G
>>30446094
see >>30445686
Its payload is in the low 40 ton range.
>>30446125
>estimated payload based on engines that do not exist
wew lad, just wew
>>30446125
I like how this image contradicts everything the 50 cent was saying about the Y-20's size.
>>30444854
>Why is Japan's "High Tech" image so misleading?
Fax machinese are the most secure comms you can get.
for japan, i think this type of cargo is enough, it's small, light and can land everywhere in the islands
i think their tanks is following the same schematic
>light, armor is barely worth it for a MBT
>canon is on par with US M1 barrel
There is an angry chinaman in this thread.
>>30444854
Why does the fuselage look wavy near the tail? is that stress? I've heard of airframes being stressed but never really seen a picture of it
>>30447137
It raises up slightly for clearance when loading cargo.
Calm down furious chinaman before you get X-2'd
