BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Greetings
This is a general thread to share information about these two projects as good info about them seems very hard to come by, but I will share what I know.
I have been meaning to write this for ages but have never got round to it until now. (I hope Keesje likes it).
The reason for my sudden rush to type this is of course the rollout date for the CX which is at last finally upon us (March 6th 2007)...or at least it should have been. The recently formed Japanese Ministry of Defence disclosed at the start of Feb. that imported rivets used in both the CX & PX had failed strength tests and that they were investigating possible effects.
The (unfortunate) effect as recently reported in the newspaper is that the rivets need replacing and rollout has been postponed to an unspecified date. The new rollout date will be judged based on the results of the investigation.
Originally I believe the plan was for the CX to be on static display at the Paris Airshow this year. I wonder is this now feasible?? I really hope it can still make it.
I also have a fairly large article about KHI's investigation into these frames into civilian aircraft. I haven't got round to translating it all yet, but will post the gist of what it says when I do.
For now though here are a bunch of (slightly old) photos of the CX / PX mock-ups that I hope you guys haven't seen before.
AAAhhhhhh...........The 'mouse over acronym' feature on this site is conflicting with the URL for the pictures I cant put them up individually or even link directly to the site.
So use the link below and change the small c (in PXcX) to a big C.
Japanese only BTW.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11025 posts, RR: 53 Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Great pictures. BTW, where did they get the flawed rivets from? Can the CX make the Paris Air Show? Possibly, but it really depends on how many revits need to be replaced. If it is only a few thousand, then they should be able to do it. But, if all revits need to be replaced, then no, it cannot be done.
N328KF From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 6203 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
The C-X looks a lot like a mini-C-17...
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 4): The C-X looks a lot like a mini-C-17...
Yeah...KHI have clearly taken some design cues from the C-17 but hey, the the C-17 is one hell of a good design....
But I think more significantly it looks like the C-1 which it is designed to replace.
Why try to re-invent the wheel???
Quoting A342 (Reply 5): What type of engine is that on the PX ?
The engine for the PX is an indigenous design being built by IHI called the XF7.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1859 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
The PX looks like the Japanese took the basic P-3 design, swept the wings and replaced turboprops with jets or fan jets. In any case, it looks like it will meet their need for a maritime patrol airplane for some years to come. I wonder if the plane has export potential? P-3 is getting long in the tooth and Boeing's P-8 may not meet the needs of every nation requiring a maritime patrol aircraft.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting BritJap (Thread starter): This is a general thread to share information about these two projects as good info about them seems very hard to come by, but I will share what I know.
Thnx for the info / photo´s!
I´ve done searches on those aircraft for years, but obviously the japanese very well managed to keep the doors closed, until now when they decided to go public (probably has to do with politics / delays).
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12357 posts, RR: 83 Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Thanks from me too, for the info on a significant, but seemingly very under-reported, pair of projects.
Despite being a democratic friendly state, you rarely see much of their post war home designed aircraft.
Partly I think due to the severe export restrictions.
There is a wealth of fascinating stuff to consider.
From their line of jet trainers, culminating in the current T-4, with the first Asian supersonic type, the T-2 trainer and single seat strike version of the 1970's-what I call the 'Jaguar-J', J for Japan! But that's not to knock the aircraft.
The virtually unknown C-1 jet transport, the lovely flying boats-a modernised version now in production for SAR.
(Surely a potential for a great fire fighting aircraft here?)
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Imagine the costs of this project. Or better projects, the two aircraft seem to have limited commonality ($20B?). The Japanese build up a lot of aerospace knowledge. Investing tens of billions only for limited domestic use and no export ambition.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Right well...
I have recently read an interview with one of the chief designers on the CX / PX program. He explained a little further about the problem with the rivets.
They were apparently one batch of many imported from the US.This particular batch had not received a heat treatment designed to increase their strength. Unfortunately if my translation is correct, this sub-standard batch has been mixed with other rivets that were fine.
And yes you guessed it...that means that the precise location of the faulty rivets is now not known!!!
The numbers involved are not too high. Approx. 2% of the total number of rivets. (Though that still equate to around 10,000 rivets) That figure relates to the CX. Lucky the figures for the PX are a lot lower, and they are hoping that there wont be significant effects on this program.
The guy explained that each rivet is having to be checked by way of measuring its electrical resistance which would be changed by the heat treatment. Where a faulty rivet is found it must be carefully drilled out, and a new one installed. This work is being carried out under 24 hour conditions he said.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
These are some photos taken I believe near the end of last year. The engines are not yet installed but they show the most complete aircraft seen yet including a hint at what they will look like with a full paint scheme.
Now I am really starting look forward to seeing these a/c in the air.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Some more pictures.......
The XF7 being tested on the C1 flying testbed.
I posted these a while ago but they didn't work, so I had the post deleted and now I am posting the page link.
The page is in Japanese but if you scroll around there are three photos of the C1 FTB with the XF7 attached.
Quote:
"KHI had planned to stage a dual roll-out ceremony for the new aircraft on 6 March, but is assessing the implications of the production fault. This centres on the use of defective rivets provided by a US supplier for the assembly of centre fuselage sections for the programme's static, fatigue and strength and flight-test aircraft."
"Japan's Kawasaki Heavy Industries is leading the development of the C-X transport, which is to replace the Japan Air Self-Defence Force's current 27 Kawasaki C-1s. The first aircraft had been scheduled to complete final assembly early next month and to make its first flight in mid-year, but this schedule has been delayed.
An air force evaluation of the C-X is due to run between fiscal years 2009 and 2011, with structural and fatigue testing also to conclude at the same time.
The C-X is to share a high level of design and component commonality with the P-X maritime patrol aircraft also being developed by Kawasaki for the Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force. The joint projects are being conducted using state funding worth ¥340 billion ($2.83 billion).
The C-X will be powered by General Electric CF6-80C2 turbofan engines and up to 44 transports could be produced to replace the C-1. The transport could also be developed for use as a commercial freighter."
Hope that shed some light into these interesting aircraft.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Pics of the XF7 in its testbed.
The testing shown below was carried out in Feb this year in the aerospace facility at Taiki, Hiroo county, Hokkaido Japan. Water was sprayed into the engine to test the effects of icing.
This shows the engine mid test.
The result after the tests.
And here's the engine itself; Rated with a thrust of approx. 6 tons ; Bypass ratio approx. 8.5.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 25, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Britjap thanks for keeping us informed. They seem to have set the information doors really wide open after many yrs of silence.
I wonder what the commercial ambitions of the industry are. They are participating in many international programs but managing a commercial program of their own no doubt is a long term ambition. With the knowledge from militairy programs and China's production power close by theoritically their are opportunities.
Maybe the XF7 engine can be used for future regional aircraft.
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4627 posts, RR: 4 Reply 26, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting BritJap (Reply 23): And here's the engine itself; Rated with a thrust of approx. 6 tons ; Bypass ratio approx. 8.5.
Do you happen to have the exact thrust in kN? If it provides at least 65kN, it could be used to re-engine the C-1. How much life have the C-1 airframes left in them?
Britjap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 27, posted (5 years 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
The day I have been waiting for has finally arrived!!!!
A few days ago there was a report that the CX & PX were going to be rolled out in mid June, but the first test aircraft have been rolled out.
These aircraft are not actually absolutely totally complete but the aircrafts functions have already begun to be tested.
I have various bits and pieces about this that I wil translate and post.
(Mind I always say that and never get round to it.....But I will really try this time)
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, RR: 2 Reply 29, posted (4 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting Britjap (Reply 27): A few days ago there was a report that the CX & PX were going to be rolled out in mid June, but the first test aircraft have been rolled out.
Interesting that the patrol aircraft is a quad, and the cargo version a twin. They must be intending on putting a lot of electronics equipment on board, which could be much heavier than the freight they plan to carry on the twinjet. What are the design payloads and ranges on these, as the report said the four-engine jet might also be used as a regional airliner and the twin a commercial transport?
Egronenthal From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (4 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 32767 times:
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 29): Interesting that the patrol aircraft is a quad, and the cargo version a twin. They must be intending on putting a lot of electronics equipment on board, which could be much heavier than the freight they plan to carry on the twinjet. What are the design payloads and ranges on these, as the report said the four-engine jet might also be used as a regional airliner and the twin a commercial transport?
I'm not sure what Flight International has been smoking, but the C-X and the P-X will be using different engines. The P-X will use four of the newly-developed XF7 engines of about 18,000-20,000 lb. thrust each, while the C-X will use two CF6 engines of around 50,000-60,000 lb. thrust each.
My guess is that there are four engines on the P-X for added safety on long over-water patrol flights. Perhaps one or more engines can also be shut down on long flights to conserve fuel.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 28959 posts, RR: 66 Reply 32, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Egronenthal From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 33, posted (4 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
IMHO, the P-X looks like the old McDonnell 119/220 on steroids...
Quote: "The high-wing transport is powered by two CF6-80C2 turbofans, is planned to have a cruise speed of M0.8, a payload of 37.6 tons and a maximum take-off weight of 141.1 tonnes. The Japanese Air Self-Defense Force is believed to want around 40 of the type. Its cargo will be carried in a hold measuring 4m x 4m x 16m. Kawasaki is studying a civil variant, which would specialise in oversize cargo. The P-X, which will be powered by four new XF-7 turbofans being developed by Ishikawajima Harima, is planned to replace the country’s Maritime Self-Defence Force’s large fleet of P-3C Orions."
.....as they indeed had correctly noted in an older report.
Quoting Egronenthal (Reply 30): My guess is that there are four engines on the P-X for added safety on long over-water patrol flights.
The very reason FI cited.....
Quote: "Given Japan’s dependence on foreign trade, maritime patrol has always been accorded a high priority and the distances involved in patrolling Pacific sea lanes have resulted in the P-X design being given four engines for safety."
Haha I am pleased to say that I could bring this news to A.net more than a week before even flightglobal!!!!
Anyways the latest word is that the official rollout for the CX & PX is happening Today*!! (Jun 4th) So there presumably (hopefully) should be a few good photos knocking about in the next few days.
So I will try to post an update with some more info soon.
But for now here are the most recent photos of these a/c that I could find. These are from Gifu AFB.
Good size comparison between the PX and the CX in the background.
* Though there are already photos of the CX & PX the aircraft have not been Officially rolled out yet.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 36, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 32603 times:
The link will probably disappear soon so look at it while its there I guess.
As I mentioned the official rollout of the the CX & PX aircraft happened today at KHI's Gifu site.
Though he was originally planned to attend, defence minister Fumio Kyuma was not present owing to the recent controversy and his subsequent resignation.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11372 posts, RR: 88 Reply 37, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 32609 times:
The Japanese could find themselves selling a commercial variant that ends up in military hands, and Embraer will have competition on it's potential twin cargo ship.
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 29): They must be intending on putting a lot of electronics equipment on board, which could be much heavier than the freight they plan to carry on the twinjet. What are the design payloads and ranges on these, as the report said the four-engine jet
I seriously wonder...could it be that the planners believe that 4 engines provides better power to the electronics along with better redundancy for safety while flying at lower altitudes for long periods? I do wonder...I really had a problem with the P-8 since we were replacing a turbo-prop known for its reliability and safety.....twin jet at lower altitudes make me nervous, I don't care who in procurement says it's fine....they generally ain't flying the airplanes. I like this Japanese product.
Quoting Egronenthal (Reply 33): IMHO, the P-X looks like the old McDonnell 119/220 on steroids...
My thoughts exactly. I actually looked into buying the 220 from the guy out in El Paso when I saw it a few years ago. I had three other guys and between us we had the cash to buy and the pilots to fly (for an imagined charter outfit that we thought we'd like to try)....but on looking at the deal we did not have the money to maintain.....but the dude selling said it was airworthy and the owner had been flying it to Africa (he said....mind you) and that the engines were the same ones that went on the firebombing P-2s so they were available. We looked at a Sabreliner too, then decided to invest in other stuff.....airplanes are expensive.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 38, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 32550 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 37): I seriously wonder...could it be that the planners believe that 4 engines provides better power to the electronics along with better redundancy for safety while flying at lower altitudes for long periods?
I think the fact the Japanese have a long term strategy to not remain a sub contractor in aerospace forever. They want to be leading when Asai Aerospace develops. Mitsubishi has plans for a RJ. We all know how to still hugely succesfull CF34 started its live / how its development got financed (TF-34, A10, S3).
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11372 posts, RR: 88 Reply 39, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 32503 times:
Quoting Keesje (Reply 38): I think the fact the Japanese have a long term strategy to not remain a sub contractor in aerospace forever.
On this we agree completely. I think that Boeing kept back the leading and trailing edge work on their wings from the Japanese in order to preserve some advantages in that technology. It's only a matter of time, however and the only way Boeing and Airbus can maintain their edge is to stay ahead. The Chinese have made it clear they intend to build up their civil aerospace industry, and the Russians (if they can keep their act together) plus the Chinese could own the 3rd world markets in commuter/RJ airplanes if they ever get past FAA/CAA requirements.
Embraer is sitting on the bubble for that market and if Japan enters it with their cargo plane then they may need to reconsider developing something new if the Japanese have that on the market.
HanginOut From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 32477 times:
The CX is one sexy bird, I wonder if I could convince anyone over at DND (Canada's Dept of National Defence) to take a look at it in place of the C130J.
Also, why would the Japanese not offer to sell the CX to anyone who may be interested?
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11372 posts, RR: 88 Reply 41, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 32446 times:
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 40): Also, why would the Japanese not offer to sell the CX to anyone who may be interested?
Because their constitution forbids them from selling military equipment abroad. The whole thing revolves around stemming any potential military expansionism they may one day try, and is rooted in the fact that MacArthur had the thing written to prevent Japan from starting any more wars with us.
Since then they've become among our closest allies, on a par with the UK worldwide but for the fact that they cannot send forces overseas (other than in very very very limited operations). It could be said that we don't do alot overseas in Asia without consensus with our Japanese allies. They fund a good deal of works they cannot do themselves.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 42, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 32431 times:
Loads I would like to post so here goes...
Starting of course with the official photos.
Heres another video link I was pointed to through 2ch.
As I guessed the last one disappeared already and this one will probably go the same way so get it while its hot.
I have read many Japanese articles about the event but they all say essentially the same basic things......
That...
-the P-X is designed to replace the P-3C. It has improved systems including a new and more powerful radar. Fly-by-Light system (one claimed it is the worlds first, true?) Also systems to allow for the direction command and control of fighter aircraft.
-the C-X is to replace the C-1. It can carry more than twice the payload and can fly about three times further at a faster speed.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 44, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 32422 times:
Also heres a short update...
The C-X & P-X official rollout has now happened, and flight testing is scheduled to get underway in September. According to the new timetable the official hand over to the Ministry of Defence will be March 2008 for the C-X and August for the P-X.
Rollout was supposed to have occurred back in March however there was a problem due to sub-standard imported rivets. The results of the ensuing investigation were released recently. Overall there are are now no longer any structural integrity issues.
On the P-X rivets needed replacing in 161 places. On the C-X the figure was much higher at 3663. Most of these rivets were replaced but in some places this was not possible so the local area around these points was reinforced with fasteners to improve local strength. This was done at 4 places on the P-X and at 369 places on the C-X. At 37 places on the C-X a 'reinforcement plate' (didnt really know how to translate that) also had to be used.
These reinforcements will of course not be needed on production aircraft.
As for the XF7-10, there had also been a problem with a damaged internal bearing but the bearing retainer was modified to fix the problem.
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, RR: 2 Reply 45, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 32404 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 39): Embraer is sitting on the bubble for that market and if Japan enters it with their cargo plane then they may need to reconsider developing something new if the Japanese have that on the market.
Quoting DL021 (Reply 41): Quoting HanginOut (Reply 40):
Also, why would the Japanese not offer to sell the CX to anyone who may be interested?
Because their constitution forbids them from selling military equipment abroad.
If what has been posited in the Civ/Av thread that the Japanese were gradually relaxing their stance and promoting the commercial transport variant to get around the "export of military equipment" prohibition, then this completed C-X prototype scheduled for flight testing in September and backstopped by Japan's economic and technological muscle has left Embraer's paper C-390 and the proposed Indo-Russian joint transport project at the starting gate.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11372 posts, RR: 88 Reply 47, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 32372 times:
Quoting BritJap (Reply 35): Haha I am pleased to say that I could bring this news to A.net more than a week before even flightglobal!!!!
Well done! This is the sort of stuff I come to this forum for.....excellent work! Thanks
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 46): Is it just me or does the PX look like an airplane out of the Tintin comics?
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 48, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 31306 times:
Hi guys
Okay back once again for another photo update...
And here are some really good videos. The first is of the rollout ceremony again. Not as fancy as the 787 rollout but still great. The other two are of the C-X and P-X performing some ground manoeuvres under their own power.
These videos are pretty large and they seemed to me to be very slow loading so you might want to save them rather than try streaming them.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 49, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 31302 times:
More photos from a Japanese news agency...
The accompanying article was stressing the scale of Japanese industrial involvement in these two projects.
Some examples but by no means all of them are...
Radar systems by Toshiba.
The acoustic systems? (hard to translate) on the P-X are made by NEC.
Control Systems by Shinko Electric.
Defensive systems (countermeasures) by Mitsubishi Electric.
Air conditioning by Shimadzu.
The Landing gear is made by Sumitomo Seimitsu.
And of course the XF-7 engines made by IHI.
The XF7-10 engine on the P-X
Here you can see the ejection ports for the sonar buoys. The round thing near the top of the picture is an IFF antenna.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1859 posts, RR: 2 Reply 51, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 31209 times:
How much bigger than the C-1 is the CX? Do I understand the Japanese aren't permitted to export their military aircraft designs?
There was a nice diagram that someone had made showing size comparisons that I saw on 2ch. If I can find it again I will post it for you.
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 51): Do I understand the Japanese aren't permitted to export their military aircraft designs?
Yes you are right about this. But it is not just aircraft. All military and military technology exports are banned in Japan. This is not as many people may think directly rooted in the constitution (though it obviously derives from the same pacifist ideals). It is a result of the laws brought in by Prime Minister Takeo Miki in 1976. The new law was an extension of the original 'three principles' policy and meant such exports could not be made to Any country. (Though sometimes exceptions are made for the US - notably the recent cooperation to jointly develop the replacement for the SM3 missiles).
There is talk that the ban will be eased ......Unfortunately there has been such talk for years, and the ban is still there!
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 53, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 30648 times:
Some really bad news this time!!
It was revealed yesterday (Jul 30) by the Japanese Ministry of Defence that some problems have been detected regarding the strength of various aircraft components.
Three issues were detailed.
Firstly...The horizontal stabiliser of the PX was found to sustain undesirable deformation under loading. It is also likely that this same problem also exists for the CX.
Secondly...The MLG and the surrounding structure suffered undesirable deformation under loading. This problem seems confined to the CX.
Finally... Probably the most significant issue. The detection of cracks and undesirable deformation of the fuselage during pressurisation. This seems to be confined to the PX.
KHI and the MoD have formed a specialist team to look at the designs and try to figure out a solution.
The effects on the program will of course depend on the findings of the team, but the MoD statement said, there will obviously be delays caused to the first flights of both the PX and CX.
The CX was due to make its first flight in Sept. but now it will be in December at the earliest.
Some major issues and set backs here.
I almost didnt want to post this news here!! It is very disappointing.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 54, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 30633 times:
I will post updates on the above news item as I have various bits and pieces to translate.
But for now here is part of a television programme I found on YouTube which is more upbeat. If you cant understand Japanese it may not be that interesting but there is some footage that I had never seen before.
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, RR: 2 Reply 55, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 30515 times:
Quoting BritJap (Reply 53): Some really bad news this time!!
It was revealed yesterday (Jul 30) by the Japanese Ministry of Defence that some problems have been detected regarding the strength of various aircraft components.
Three issues were detailed.
Firstly...The horizontal stabiliser of the PX was found to sustain undesirable deformation under loading. It is also likely that this same problem also exists for the CX.
Secondly...The MLG and the surrounding structure suffered undesirable deformation under loading. This problem seems confined to the CX.
Finally... Probably the most significant issue. The detection of cracks and undesirable deformation of the fuselage during pressurisation. This seems to be confined to the PX.
These would cast serious doubts on Japan's announced intent to develop an indigenous stealth fighter.....
Quote: "'We have not decided if we will build a prototype aircraft,' says Japan's defence ministry, which confirms that the study started several months ago. 'Of course, we are interested in next-generation technology and advanced fighters with stealth capabilities. But we have not decided on how we will get it.'
The ministry must formally request funding, possibly for the 2008-9 fiscal year, if it wishes to advance the project, but it would take several years and require significant research and development investment to acquire the technology.
Domestic airframe manufacturers such as Kawasaki Heavy Industries and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries would be involved, although it would be difficult for them to start from scratch without outside help.
'Only American companies like Lockheed or Boeing have access to technology like this, so it would be difficult without them on board,' says a Tokyo-based analyst. 'Even the Russians have been trying hard for many years without much success. It would be a gargantuan effort for Japan to be successful.'"
Yes I first read about this project several months ago. I have received absolutely tons of articles relating to this recently but simply have not bothered to translate them yet. I was going to do so this weekend and start another thread on the subject.
But I would rather not talk about the FX or the F-22 in this thread!!!
LMP737 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 4459 posts, RR: 27 Reply 59, posted (4 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 28663 times:
Looking at the PX it sort of looks like a cross between a P-3 and a DC-8.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 60, posted (4 years 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 27822 times:
Wow....well, this time I am pleased to bring some good news!! I am constantly away from the computer these days so I am actually a bit late in bringing this news to you.
But on Friday 28th September 2007 the Kawasaki PX made its maiden flight from JASDF Gifu Airbase, Gifu Prefecture, Japan.
The flight lasted for about one hour. The pilot reported that the aircraft was stable and flew very much as anticipated by the flight simulator. The fuselage and engines performed without problems.
The aircraft was known as 'test aircraft #1' (ŽŽì1†‹@ in Japanese). But following Fridays successful flight has been assigned the number XP-1.
There is a video released by the MoD, but some clever chap has already put it on youtube so here it is.
I can only surmise that the problems I reported a few months ago were found to be not as serious as I thought. The first flight of the CX is still currently planned for December.
All in all a Great milestone. I look forward to bringing news of a successful CX first flight.
BritJap From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, RR: 2 Reply 63, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 27498 times:
A few more details about Fridays flight....
The flight was on Fri. 28th September 2007 at 9:38am Japanese time. The aircraft was flown by pilots from KHI flight section, captain Akihiro Sekido with Yoshinao Baba as co-pilot. There were a further nine others aboard the aircraft for the duration of the flight.
The aircraft took off west before returning approx. 60 mins later landing from the east. The pilot performed a low pass before going around to finally land.
The XP-1 was also escorted by two P-3Cs.
Below is a link to a Japanese spotters site where he has put up some photos of the flight that he took from outside the airbase.
Sponsor Message: 
From Japan, joined Aug 2006, 233 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11025 posts, 
, 6203 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4627 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12357 posts, 
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1232 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, 
(Its big so click to expand)
From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 651 posts, 
From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, 
(In reply 48)
B4e-Forever New Frontiers 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
