Two different airplane categories. KC 390 is designed to take off on short and unpaved runways, such as the rain forest Amazon. That's why it's smaller
@@miraphycs7377 the amazon is always muddy, that means the soil is worse than a average japanese backyard soil... when it rains there is a huge excess of water making the earth behaving like quicksand.
KC390 Foi projetado para operar em pequenas pistas de terra por isso ele é mais leve do que o poderoso Kawasaki. Tenho uma oficina naval e admiro demais a mecânica japonesa. O Poderoso Kawasaki não consegue pousar em pistas de terra como da Amazônia do Brasil, muito peso exige maior pista e um solo mais firme. Podemos operar o KC 390 sem dificuldades em qualquer pista simples sem pavimentação além de pista curta, ele foi desenvolvido para isso pousar em qualquer lugar mesmo pistas bem pequenas em locais remotos.
Tem isso tbm.. Mas, mesmo assim, ainda acho que daria para ser um pouco melhor entende? Ha varios motivos para tudo isso tambem.. O brasileiro sabe disso... Mas, sabe aquela sensacao de que "nao se chegou no melhor possivel?" Seria essa a minha sensacao...
@@user-kinshi Respeito sua opinião porém não sinto essa sensação pois você viu o valor do cargueiro japonês? é quase o dobro do valor de um KC390 somado a isso vejo muita tecnologia de ponta com o que há de melhor no mundo militar atualmente, sendo ainda atualizado constantemente! Sinto uma sensação de que nesse projeto foi usado muita dedicação e foi feito o melhor possível para deixar em um valor surpreendentemente competitivo!
@@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn Poise... Por isso critico a ideia de custo-beneficio baixo... Porque se nao tiver uma ideia de atualizacao, ou, melhoramento para novas tecnologias futuras, etc.. O custo-beneficio baixo, pode ficar obsoleto rapidamente... E isso acaba com o proprio custo-beneficio. E os militares brasileiros sabem disso, mas, acredito que ficam muito na mao, justamente porque eles nao tem uma ajuda necessaria, e isso eh um problema grave da politica tosca do brasil... Ou ate, um problema serio de seriedade individual do proprio brasileiro... Eh triste mas esse sera sempre o fato que prejudica as forcas armadas brasileiras..
@@user-kinshi Agora sobre a politica do brasil a respeito das nossas forças armadas é sim completamente sem noção, pois estamos de fato ficando para trás, e agora com esse ladrão de 9 dedos no poder vai ficar ainda pior!
Two planes with such different payload capacities cannot be compared. The KC390 belongs to a smaller size class like the C130. The direct competitor of the C2 is the airbus A400M and the AN70 AN188.
The C2 is designed for emergency rescue in peacetime disasters rather than war. It delivers food, medicine, tents, sleeping bags, etc. to evacuees in disaster areas. In addition, C2 will transport off-road vehicles (Land Cruisers, etc.), 8-ton trucks, helicopters, and excavators from Japan for transportation in disaster areas. The scope of the relief efforts includes the Caribbean (e.g., Haiti), South Pacific (e.g., Tonga), Turkey, and Africa (Sudan).
Me,as a Brazilian Citizen naturally root for the plane made at Brazil's Embraer to be more successful, however...yeah they're really magestic. Both Brazil and Japan did a awesome job.congrats.
The impression I have is that the kc-390 delivers much more for the price offered, and is more prepared for different situations, practically lands anywhere. I also heard that the operational capacity of the kc-390 is very high, it finishes one flight and in a short time it is ready for the second flight, in addition to the low maintenance cost.
You should compare: KC-390 vs C-130J-30 or Kawasaki C2 vs Airbus A400M KC-390 and Kawasaki C-2 are completely different size, C-2 is around twice the empty weight of KC-390.
The C-390 Millenium was designed to replace the old C-130 Hercules of the Brazilian Air Force and compete in the international medium freighter market.
The C-2 was developed more for transporting supplies (food, medicine, tents...) in times of disaster than for military use. For example, earthquakes in Haiti in Central America, volcanic eruptions in Tonga in the South Pacific, earthquakes in Nepal and Turkey, and emergency evacuation of Japanese expatriates during wars and conflicts in the Middle East, Sudan and Israel. The C-370 has no such mission, so its size is sufficient.
The size of KC390 it's not a coincidence, and it's actually an advantage. Those 2 aircrafts aren't even in the same category. BTW EMBRAER ALSO have a huge experience in development/construction of military aircrafts, Super Tucano it's the best seller from all light fighter plane in the world.
El Kawasaki C2 es más un competidor del Airbus A400M o Antonov An 70, dada sus capacidades,; mientras el Embraer kc390 es un competidor del Lockheed C130 Hércules, lo anterior por sus capacidades
🇧🇷 Embraer was born from the Brazilian MIT (Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica - ITA), the best engineering school in Brazil. It was really challenging to earn my BSc in Electronic Engineering there.
US$200 million buys two C-2 units and US$180 million buys three KC 390s. Much more use and load capacity, lower purchase and maintenance costs, more operational capability. KC-900 is a big player
The KC-390 Tanker is an excellent concept and perfect for the Philippines. If the Philippines brings on F-16 or KF-21 you will have to have that boom for refueling. Just for tanking you will need at least a half dozen, but if you use them for rapid transports you will need more than that. My analysis is the Philippines needs dual use KC-390 Tankers before they need a single purpose C-2 transport. Got nothing against the C-2 transport . . . the Philippines need a tanker more than they need a new jet transport. The KC-390 gives you both! The C-2 has been represented as Tanker Capable . . . where is the prototype. Buy existing capability equipment only, not something in development. promises are cheap/easy. Performance is tough. The Embraer KC-390 Tanker needs that Standard Philippine Avionics Package makeover.
Huge opportunity for tying up of Embraer and Kawasaki and produce the Kw C-2 in numbers. Currently its potential is capped due to high unit & ops cost, small batches of JPN only order. Why not create a joint enterprise of their defense aerospace business and offer a true and capable competitor of A 400-M. And down the line, offer a scaled up version as replacement for C-17 Globemaster(lot of airframes will need to be shelved by existing customers in a decade or two).
K means tank, an C is for cargo.. The problem of the japan one is the price and the needs. Not much countries need a bigger craft like these, Embraer knowing this projected a plane that they know would be more likely to sell because of the price, so they made a good plane for that specific category. Making a plane like a kawasaki is too risky and not essential i think. Only for the japan tho. Both surely suffer from one thing, USA lobby, so small market dominated from a strong political player. Kawasaki exist more because of Japan culture of creating their one things. Most of the things of japan are made from their own companies.
As a Japanese, I am proud that both Japan and Brazil have excellent transport aircraft that are adapted to the various situations in their respective countries.
I personally saw the KC-390, it's an incredible aircraft, very modern and with an unbeatable price, the value of a kawasaki, you buy 2 kc-390, so I think it's more advantageous.
You forgot one of the most important metrics in this comparison, the average fuel consumption of each one, after all, directly impacts the flight hour cost, which you also didn't compare, both of which are an advantage for the KC 390.
There is more the engine on the KC390 is the most common engine in the world, any country that has any type of civilian aircraft maintenance capability will have technics with certification to work on this engines. The aircraft is not appealing to countries with larger forces with much larger payloads to carry around, a smaller plane with smaller payload is not cheaper per weight Carried but a lot of potential costumer just don’t have those needs, hence why Netherlands, Portugal, Hungary. This is the kind of costumer it caters to.
The C-2 uses the same engine of the 747-400 the CF6-80C2 and KC-390 uses V2500, same engine of Airbus A320. Different categories but both are outstanding aircrafts. I think KC-390 has best applications once it can land on short and unprepeard runways. In a peaces times maybe C-2 is a good choice but in hard times KC-390 will fit better.
For the same reason that only the United States operates the C-1, the C-17 and C-2 may or may not appear costly, depending on the degree of need. The KC-390 is a very good aircraft, but from the Japanese point of view, the performance of the KC-390 is unacceptable, even at a price of $60 million.
São categorias diferentes, o kc 390 foi feito para substituir os c130 Hércules, foi projetado para pousar e decolar em pistas de pouso de estrada de terra e curtas da Amazônia.
@@fromfareastindy8234 I kinda agree. The KC390 size is somewhat similar to Indonesian and Chinese turboprop offers. The C2 is bigger than the KC390 yet similar to the earlier model C130s with shorter fuselages.
To settle the matter - they are both similar objective aircraft. They both can take off from short, and unpaved runways (500~600m). Operation parameters of both aircraft is almost the same. Kawasaki C2 is just bigger aircraft - however, I don't know the maintenance cost comparison of both aircraft since C2 is not sold internationally.
South Korea may order 3 of KC390. The news isn't official yet but SK media reports the Korean Government will make the decision to purchase by the end of 2023.
I had the honor to participate in some missions in the KC390. It's a very unique aircraft e extremely capable, versatile e easy to operate. I've seen this aircraft operate well beyond it's limits and the KC nailed It.
Different categories . It is the same as to compare A400 with Hercules. As R.A.F. shows with C 130 , A 400 and C 17 inventory , there are specific tasks for every. I think the way Embraer has very good comercial ties with Kawasaki it should manufacture C 2 in Brazil for Brazilian Air Force and South America. And later on Embraer could go on to a heavy cargo project by itself or in a joint venture. Antonov has a few problems now and could be a good partner for that .Or Kawasaki. " I have a dream" A large country must have all cargo categories. Even small countries have them if they are world Powers. A powerful wide range cargo plane force must have all load ,range and speed capacities. These two good aircraft are really complementary. Ws military analyst M.C. Brazil Order of the Temple
The C-2 was developed more for transporting supplies (food, medicine, tents...) in times of disaster than for military use. For example, earthquakes in Haiti in Central America, volcanic eruptions in Tonga in the South Pacific, earthquakes in Nepal and Turkey, and emergency evacuation of Japanese expatriates during wars and conflicts in the Middle East, Sudan and Israel. The C-370 has no such mission, so its size is sufficient.
Embraer kc 390 operates on short runways and unprepared runways. lands safely on runway without preparation. the Japanese plane, being heavier, needs a bigger runway and a prepared runway. embraer reaches up to 1,000 km/h if necessary.
@@MilMI-24 The “minimum takeoff run distance of 500 meters” is the value specified in the Defense Agency's “Requirements for C-X” at the time, so it is highly possible that the actual performance of the C-2 will be even shorter. Please check the official video “IFU; Transport Aircraft C-2”.
@@minhafamilianaamerica2305 I think that Embraer should manufacture Kawasaki C 2 as a next step for Latin , African countries and Brazil. They are clearly of different categories. Kawasaki produces the wings of several Embraer models already.
2 produtos feitos sobre medida pra sua forças aéreas, o japonês é 55 porcento mais caro e opera no padrão japonês em pistas longas e com muito payload gourmet, o kc 390 pode competir com o c130 pois nescessita de apenas 500 mts de pista podendo ser de Terra e carrega 26 toneladas de carga pode atuar em áreas com pouca ou nenhuma resolução de pouso. feito sob medida pro Brasil e para o resto do mundo pois cabe em qualquer força aérea vai revolucionar o mercado pois tem o melhor custo benefício por tonelada transportada, mas é apenas de uma categoria diferente do modelo japonês que custa mais e depende de aeroportos com condições normais de funcionamento, o legal seria ter ambos na mesma força aérea
Exato, e sem contar que o KC 390 tem um expressivo menor consumo de combustível, o que compensa com sobra a sua menor capacidade de carga com relação ao avião "made in Japan".
Both cargo planes are state of the art products. Since the KC 2 got a higher or bigger capacity, i will go for this one. The lower budget countries will go for the Embraer.
You forgot to mention that the C-390 also has full fly-by-wire controls. Also, short take-off & landing, a strong feature on the C-390 was not mentioned. Anyway, comparing both airplanes is a bit silly, as they are in different categories. It's like comparing an Airbus A220 to a Boeing 737-900. Different beasts altogether.
I prefer the KC-390. I think it offers good arguments at a more reasonable price. Moreover, although this is not the most important in a military aircraft, the KC-390 is much more aesthetically beautiful. My opinion. Congratulations to both builders Kawasaki and Embraer.
Kawasaki C2 is much larger aircraft and has better capability than KC 390; but it is correspondingly costlier. You get what you pay for, so both aircrafts are very competitive in their respective category.
The KC-390 is meant to replace the C-120. The C-2 is meant to life heavier. bulkier, cargos. The C-2 also has the range to fly fully loaded from Japan to Alaska or Hawaii unrefueled.
Two great aircrafts. KC-390 is more flexible in terms of type of missions, it is cheaper to acquire, and cheaper to maintain. However C-2 has more capacity overall. The Japanese don't need to be jealous, there are Japanese descendant engineers at Embraer.
Huge opportunity for tying up of Embraer and Kawasaki and produce the Kw C-2 in numbers. Currently its potential is capped due to high unit & ops cost, small batches of JPN only order. Why not create a joint enterprise of their defense aerospace business and offer a true and capable competitor of A 400-M. And down the line, offer a scaled up version as replacement for C-17 Globemaster(lot of airframes will need to be shelved by existing customers in a decade or two so opportunities galore). That way, you have a true global airlifter giant offering at every payload class.
Acho que não tem como comprá-los, pois são de categorias diferentes. Há enormes diferenças entre eles, inclusive no preço. Vantagens e desvantagens. No final não há um melhor e sim o mais adequado para a proposta de cada um.
Worth it buying 2 KC390 instead of buying a C2. Also KC390 can take off and land in shorter and earth runways, C2 can only land on asphalted runways. The only real advantage of C2 over KC390 is its longer range.
In Japan, there are strict laws and regulations regarding both the military's activities outside its territory and the export of military aircraft, so domestically produced military aircraft are made with performance only suited to the activities of the Japanese military. Comparing these two machines is nonsense.
I am a huge fan of embraer and kc390 is really a full multi task cargo plane perfect to substitute the hold c130. C2 also looks a pretty good plane, a bit bigger but with similar similar capabilities and so I think Embraer is first choice. Being the 3rd world manufacteur, Embraer will have a huge commercial advantage over Kawasaki but this is a different market.
Similar capabilities no. How many helicopter can transport the KC390? KC390 can compite with C130. The C2 is the similar capabilities of an M400 or AN70
@@ettorefieramosca5460 How many helicopter can transport the KC390? = It has already carried 1 Black Hawk, if we only carry the weight it can carry ~3, but the volume of the Helicopter and the available space means it can only carry 1 at a time
@@MilMI-24 ok so they don't have similar capabilities if the C2 comfortably carries 2 attack helicopters and has about 50% more cargo capacity and volume.
Sorry, but the C390 Milenium is here, flying, serving, already tested, already aproved, being sold all around and has many different tec advantages. No comparition is possible.
Japan and Brazil have shared their aeroplane technology and blueprints on many model. For example , Japan regional jet Mitsubishi MRJ is the same product as Brazil Embrae E-190. And so on to this small transport plane.
"Kawasaki C-2" is a jet plane with the transport capacity more than the equal to A400M. The flight path of "Kawasaki C-2" looks like a civil transport plane. It flies because at high speed over the upper sky of 12200m. The minimum take off slide distance is 500m because there is a duty which takes off from the airport in the solitary island, too. Kawasaki C-2 Embraer C-390 Millennium Empty weight: 69,000[62] kg (152,119 lb) ? Max takeoff weight: 141,400 kg (311,734 lb) Max takeoff weight: 86,999 kg (191,800 lb) Cruise speed: 890 km/h (550 mph, 480 kn) / M0.8 Cruise speed: 870 km/h (540 mph, 470 kn) Mach 0.8 Ferry range: 9,800 km (6,100 mi, 5,300 nmi) Ferry range: normal ferry 3,310 nmi, 6,130 km; 8,500 km (5,300 mi, 4,600 nmi) max. with aux. fuel tanks; Range: 7,600 km (4,700 mi, 4,100 nmi) with 20 t (20 long tons; 22 short tons) payload Range: 5,820 km (3,610 mi, 3,140 nmi) with 14,000 kg (30,865 lb) payload Minimum takeoff distance: 500 m (1,641 ft) ?
Comes a new version partnered with USA (KC-390 Millennium Flying Boom) this version of supply Flying Boom. Soon the American force will buy many in the USAF air force.
Different load. Different goals and solutions. Almost different categories. Brasil should manufacture and have both. Kawasaki manufactures structures for several Embraer aircraft in Brazil. A partnership would be a very good option . Embraer, Kawasaki and KAI should be partners in a heavy weight cargo plane. Ws// military analyst Order of the Temple
The difference is that the KC-390 is an agility machine. Land any fucking place... 600 meters is enough for landing and takeoff. Brazilian masterpiece!
Those airplanes seem designed for different kinds of operations, it is a matter of scale. The airplane KC-390 is destined to replace is the Hercules. The japanese Kawasaki C-2 looks like an airplane for more extensive operations with more troops and less discretion.
The Kawasaki C-2 is in a different category, they don't compete in the same range. The Embraer plane is an excellent freighter, but has lower capacity and autonomy.
KC-390 o melhor em sua categoria , muito tecnológico e versátil , um avião robusto , muito a frente de seus concorrentes, Parabéns ao BRAZIL e a Embraer !!!
Two different airplane categories. KC 390 is designed to take off on short and unpaved runways, such as the rain forest Amazon. That's why it's smaller
c-2 can take off and land in 500m. They also demonstrated capability use unpaved and semi-paved runways.
@@miraphycs7377 But not from the Amazon, Pantanal or caatinga.
@@miraphycs7377 the amazon is always muddy, that means the soil is worse than a average japanese backyard soil... when it rains there is a huge excess of water making the earth behaving like quicksand.
yes
@I Love The Way U lie Why other countriens fly on "tropical Florests"...
These two its not so directly comparable, the are desing whith diferent specs
KC390 Foi projetado para operar em pequenas pistas de terra por isso ele é mais leve do que o poderoso Kawasaki.
Tenho uma oficina naval e admiro demais a mecânica japonesa.
O Poderoso Kawasaki não consegue pousar em pistas de terra como da Amazônia do Brasil, muito peso exige maior pista e um solo mais firme.
Podemos operar o KC 390 sem dificuldades em qualquer pista simples sem pavimentação além de pista curta, ele foi desenvolvido para isso pousar em qualquer lugar mesmo pistas bem pequenas em locais remotos.
c-2 can take off and land in 500m. They also demonstrated capability use unpaved and semi-paved runways. Although yes it is a bit bigger and heavier
Tem isso tbm..
Mas, mesmo assim, ainda acho que daria para ser um pouco melhor entende?
Ha varios motivos para tudo isso tambem.. O brasileiro sabe disso...
Mas, sabe aquela sensacao de que "nao se chegou no melhor possivel?"
Seria essa a minha sensacao...
@@user-kinshi Respeito sua opinião porém não sinto essa sensação pois você viu o valor do cargueiro japonês? é quase o dobro do valor de um KC390 somado a isso vejo muita tecnologia de ponta com o que há de melhor no mundo militar atualmente, sendo ainda atualizado constantemente! Sinto uma sensação de que nesse projeto foi usado muita dedicação e foi feito o melhor possível para deixar em um valor surpreendentemente competitivo!
@@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn Poise...
Por isso critico a ideia de custo-beneficio baixo...
Porque se nao tiver uma ideia de atualizacao, ou, melhoramento para novas tecnologias futuras, etc..
O custo-beneficio baixo, pode ficar obsoleto rapidamente... E isso acaba com o proprio custo-beneficio.
E os militares brasileiros sabem disso, mas, acredito que ficam muito na mao, justamente porque eles nao tem uma ajuda necessaria, e isso eh um problema grave da politica tosca do brasil... Ou ate, um problema serio de seriedade individual do proprio brasileiro...
Eh triste mas esse sera sempre o fato que prejudica as forcas armadas brasileiras..
@@user-kinshi Agora sobre a politica do brasil a respeito das nossas forças armadas é sim completamente sem noção, pois estamos de fato ficando para trás, e agora com esse ladrão de 9 dedos no poder vai ficar ainda pior!
Two planes with such different payload capacities cannot be compared. The KC390 belongs to a smaller size class like the C130. The direct competitor of the C2 is the airbus A400M and the AN70 AN188.
Kc390 is half the price of the Japanese model
@@darlanribeiro4692 ok. You pay less for less volume and less payload capacity.
@@darlanribeiro4692
Prefiro o C-2, não gosto de lixo.
Amen!
@@Picanhadopapaimolusco Lixo?
kc390 is the future of c130. C2 is a miniature of c17. different purpose. Both are great planes.
Get out of my head. PRECISELY what I was thinking watching the comparison of the two aircraft.
The C2 is designed for emergency rescue in peacetime disasters rather than war. It delivers food, medicine, tents, sleeping bags, etc. to evacuees in disaster areas.
In addition, C2 will transport off-road vehicles (Land Cruisers, etc.), 8-ton trucks, helicopters, and excavators from Japan for transportation in disaster areas.
The scope of the relief efforts includes the Caribbean (e.g., Haiti), South Pacific (e.g., Tonga), Turkey, and Africa (Sudan).
It is, so to speak, like Thunderbird 2 in the 1960s British puppet TV drama (International Rescue Team).
🤔
Me,as a Brazilian Citizen naturally root for the plane made at Brazil's Embraer to be more successful, however...yeah they're really magestic. Both Brazil and Japan did a awesome job.congrats.
Isso tudo é apenas a realidade, o Brasil era pra estar muito mas avançando do que isso
The impression I have is that the kc-390 delivers much more for the price offered, and is more prepared for different situations, practically lands anywhere. I also heard that the operational capacity of the kc-390 is very high, it finishes one flight and in a short time it is ready for the second flight, in addition to the low maintenance cost.
二回目の飛行の準備が簡単なのはC-2も同じです。C-2は度々整備能力がない海外の飛行場への離着陸を行っています。
Aircraft are not chosen for impressions, but for their usefulness and cost of operation.
kc 390 was designed for rapid transport of troops, vehicles and supplies, and in short runway locations.
One of the items that matters most is the price, the kc390 is almost half the price!
They should've made c390 volumous cargo friendly. It's best medium cargo aircraft
You should compare:
KC-390 vs C-130J-30 or
Kawasaki C2 vs Airbus A400M
KC-390 and Kawasaki C-2 are completely different size, C-2 is around twice the empty weight of KC-390.
An-148 or An-178 with KC-390. Ukrainians (now agrarian country) have done it a decade ago😂
The C-390 Millenium was designed to replace the old C-130 Hercules of the Brazilian Air Force and compete in the international medium freighter market.
Both are great planes in their own category. The KC390 was exhibited recently at Aero India 2023.
Congratulations EMBRAER, KAWASAKI 🇧🇷🇯🇵
The C-2 was developed more for transporting supplies (food, medicine, tents...) in times of disaster than for military use. For example, earthquakes in Haiti in Central America, volcanic eruptions in Tonga in the South Pacific, earthquakes in Nepal and Turkey, and emergency evacuation of Japanese expatriates during wars and conflicts in the Middle East, Sudan and Israel.
The C-370 has no such mission, so its size is sufficient.
The size of KC390 it's not a coincidence, and it's actually an advantage.
Those 2 aircrafts aren't even in the same category.
BTW EMBRAER ALSO have a huge experience in development/construction of military aircrafts, Super Tucano it's the best seller from all light fighter plane in the world.
El Kawasaki C2 es más un competidor del Airbus A400M o Antonov An 70, dada sus capacidades,; mientras el Embraer kc390 es un competidor del Lockheed C130 Hércules, lo anterior por sus capacidades
Voei no KC-390 , de Manaus até RORAIMA , FOI Showw.
Price difference is huge compared to compatibility if you buy 2 kc air craft then you can buy less price buy 3 Brazilian Aircraft
You should compare, right?:
KC-390 vs C-130J-30 or
Kawasaki C2 vs Airbus A400M
They seem to be both great an beautiful airplanes and hold excellence in their own weight category.
Kc 390 foi projetado para pistas curtas e não pavimentadas ...São categorias diferentes
Além disso com o valor de um Cargueiro japonês consegue comprar quase dois KC 390 e sabemos que 2 são melhores que 1 kkkk...
Agree.
The kc390 is the future of the c130. C2 is a miniature of c17. different purpose. Both are great planes.
@@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn boa kkkkkkkkkk
Em geral usam hélices em pistas não pavimentadas.
@@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn 良いことばかりではなく、単純にパイロットや整備員が2倍必要になります。
🇧🇷 Embraer was born from the Brazilian MIT (Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica - ITA), the best engineering school in Brazil. It was really challenging to earn my BSc in Electronic Engineering there.
US$200 million buys two C-2 units and US$180 million buys three KC 390s. Much more use and load capacity, lower purchase and maintenance costs, more operational capability.
KC-900 is a big player
they are different products, the kc is a competitor of the c130
Concorrente não, substituto. O 130 já é obsoleto e já está sendo substituído em quase todas as forças aereas
Why compare these two aircrafts? Why not C2 vs A400? Or KC390 vs C130J?
The KC-390 Tanker is an excellent concept and perfect for the Philippines. If the Philippines brings on F-16 or KF-21 you will have to have that boom for refueling. Just for tanking you will need at least a half dozen, but if you use them for rapid transports you will need more than that.
My analysis is the Philippines needs dual use KC-390 Tankers before they need a single purpose C-2 transport. Got nothing against the C-2 transport . . . the Philippines need a tanker more than they need a new jet transport. The KC-390 gives you both!
The C-2 has been represented as Tanker Capable . . . where is the prototype. Buy existing capability equipment only, not something in development. promises are cheap/easy. Performance is tough.
The Embraer KC-390 Tanker needs that Standard Philippine Avionics Package makeover.
Brazil have a lot of short strips in amazon frontier, with 1400m long. The size of KC390 was planned for this.
Huge opportunity for tying up of Embraer and Kawasaki and produce the Kw C-2 in numbers. Currently its potential is capped due to high unit & ops cost, small batches of JPN only order. Why not create a joint enterprise of their defense aerospace business and offer a true and capable competitor of A 400-M. And down the line, offer a scaled up version as replacement for C-17 Globemaster(lot of airframes will need to be shelved by existing customers in a decade or two).
K means tank, an C is for cargo..
The problem of the japan one is the price and the needs. Not much countries need a bigger craft like these, Embraer knowing this projected a plane that they know would be more likely to sell because of the price, so they made a good plane for that specific category.
Making a plane like a kawasaki is too risky and not essential i think. Only for the japan tho.
Both surely suffer from one thing, USA lobby, so small market dominated from a strong political player.
Kawasaki exist more because of Japan culture of creating their one things. Most of the things of japan are made from their own companies.
As a Japanese, I am proud that both Japan and Brazil have excellent transport aircraft that are adapted to the various situations in their respective countries.
I personally saw the KC-390, it's an incredible aircraft, very modern and with an unbeatable price, the value of a kawasaki, you buy 2 kc-390, so I think it's more advantageous.
Beide Modelle haben Vor- und Nachteile und beide haben ihre Daseinsberechtigung. Interessantes Video!
You forgot one of the most important metrics in this comparison, the average fuel consumption of each one, after all, directly impacts the flight hour cost, which you also didn't compare, both of which are an advantage for the KC 390.
There is more the engine on the KC390 is the most common engine in the world, any country that has any type of civilian aircraft maintenance capability will have technics with certification to work on this engines. The aircraft is not appealing to countries with larger forces with much larger payloads to carry around, a smaller plane with smaller payload is not cheaper per weight Carried but a lot of potential costumer just don’t have those needs, hence why Netherlands, Portugal, Hungary. This is the kind of costumer it caters to.
The C-2 uses the same engine of the 747-400 the CF6-80C2 and KC-390 uses V2500, same engine of Airbus A320. Different categories but both are outstanding aircrafts.
I think KC-390 has best applications once it can land on short and unprepeard runways. In a peaces times maybe C-2 is a good choice but in hard times KC-390 will fit better.
Do you believe the Japanese engineers would agree with your opinion?
Kawasaki C2 is way more expansive than KC390. Kawasaki C2 makes no sense at 120 million dollar per aircarft.
For the same reason that only the United States operates the C-1, the C-17 and C-2 may or may not appear costly, depending on the degree of need.
The KC-390 is a very good aircraft, but from the Japanese point of view, the performance of the KC-390 is unacceptable, even at a price of $60 million.
São categorias diferentes, o kc 390 foi feito para substituir os c130 Hércules, foi projetado para pousar e decolar em pistas de pouso de estrada de terra e curtas da Amazônia.
@FromFarEast INDY were you trying to say only the US operates the C-17? If so, that is highly inaccurate
Lol smartest indian
@@fromfareastindy8234
I kinda agree. The KC390 size is somewhat similar to Indonesian and Chinese turboprop offers. The C2 is bigger than the KC390 yet similar to the earlier model C130s with shorter fuselages.
To settle the matter - they are both similar objective aircraft. They both can take off from short, and unpaved runways (500~600m). Operation parameters of both aircraft is almost the same. Kawasaki C2 is just bigger aircraft - however, I don't know the maintenance cost comparison of both aircraft since C2 is not sold internationally.
Major difference: cargo capacity and price: C-2: 35 ton US$95 million vs KC-390: 25 ton US $50 million.
The C-2 actually competes in the same category as the Airbus A400M, while the KC-390 competes in the category of the C-130J.
South Korea may order 3 of KC390. The news isn't official yet but SK media reports the Korean Government will make the decision to purchase by the end of 2023.
you were right. south korea chose kc390
I had the honor to participate in some missions in the KC390. It's a very unique aircraft e extremely capable, versatile e easy to operate. I've seen this aircraft operate well beyond it's limits and the KC nailed It.
Different categories .
It is the same as to compare A400 with Hercules.
As R.A.F. shows with C 130 , A 400 and C 17 inventory , there are specific tasks for every.
I think the way Embraer has very good comercial ties with Kawasaki it should manufacture C 2 in Brazil for Brazilian Air Force and South America.
And later on Embraer could go on to a heavy cargo project by itself or in a joint venture.
Antonov has a few problems now and could be a good partner for that .Or Kawasaki.
" I have a dream"
A large country must have all cargo categories.
Even small countries have them if they are world Powers.
A powerful wide range cargo plane force must have all load ,range and speed capacities.
These two good aircraft are really complementary.
Ws military analyst
M.C. Brazil
Order of the Temple
C-390 Millenium incrible
The C-2 was developed more for transporting supplies (food, medicine, tents...) in times of disaster than for military use. For example, earthquakes in Haiti in Central America, volcanic eruptions in Tonga in the South Pacific, earthquakes in Nepal and Turkey, and emergency evacuation of Japanese expatriates during wars and conflicts in the Middle East, Sudan and Israel.
The C-370 has no such mission, so its size is sufficient.
I love both aircraft.
Embraer kc 390 operates on short runways and unprepared runways.
lands safely on runway without preparation.
the Japanese plane, being heavier, needs a bigger runway and a prepared runway.
embraer reaches up to 1,000 km/h if necessary.
残念ながらエンジンパワーに大きな差があるため、長い滑走路を必要とするのはKC390の方です。最短離陸滑走距離はKC390の1,100mに対し、C-2は500ｍです。積載物が多いほど、この差は大きくなります。
@@かこうえん-l4l You got confused in the data, the C-2 takes off in 900m, its LANDING distance is 500m.
@@MilMI-24 The “minimum takeoff run distance of 500 meters” is the value specified in the Defense Agency's “Requirements for C-X” at the time, so it is highly possible that the actual performance of the C-2 will be even shorter.
Please check the official video “IFU; Transport Aircraft C-2”.
Two impressive engineering works.
KAWASAKI heavy industry makes aircrafts, Shinkansen(bullet trains),trains,ships,motor cycles.
Just like comparing; 767-200 vs A321-200
I agree entirely.
@@waltersergio3032 but which one is which?
@@minhafamilianaamerica2305 I think that Embraer should manufacture Kawasaki C 2 as a next step for Latin , African countries and Brazil.
They are clearly of different categories.
Kawasaki produces the wings of several Embraer models already.
São diferentes em tamanho,peso, capacidades,uma comparação sem nexo,cada um feito pra uma necessidade....
Biggest difference, the price.
@Jetline Marvel Why not make a comparison video between the Kawasaki C2 and the Airbus A400M since they're almost the same dimension/size? Thanks.
2 produtos feitos sobre medida pra sua forças aéreas, o japonês é 55 porcento mais caro e opera no padrão japonês em pistas longas e com muito payload gourmet, o kc 390 pode competir com o c130 pois nescessita de apenas 500 mts de pista podendo ser de Terra e carrega 26 toneladas de carga pode atuar em áreas com pouca ou nenhuma resolução de pouso. feito sob medida pro Brasil e para o resto do mundo pois cabe em qualquer força aérea vai revolucionar o mercado pois tem o melhor custo benefício por tonelada transportada, mas é apenas de uma categoria diferente do modelo japonês que custa mais e depende de aeroportos com condições normais de funcionamento, o legal seria ter ambos na mesma força aérea
@@powderorange rs
Exato, e sem contar que o KC 390 tem um expressivo menor consumo de combustível, o que compensa com sobra a sua menor capacidade de carga com relação ao avião "made in Japan".
Necesidades de cada País , los Dos son 💪💯
C-390 Millenium é espetacular!!👏👏👏
Both are great doing their job, but by the price of 1 C-2 you can get 3 (!) 390.
Both cargo planes are state of the art products. Since the KC 2 got a higher or bigger capacity, i will go for this one. The lower budget countries will go for the Embraer.
You forgot to mention that the C-390 also has full fly-by-wire controls. Also, short take-off & landing, a strong feature on the C-390 was not mentioned.
Anyway, comparing both airplanes is a bit silly, as they are in different categories. It's like comparing an Airbus A220 to a Boeing 737-900. Different beasts altogether.
I prefer the KC-390. I think it offers good arguments at a more reasonable price. Moreover, although this is not the most important in a military aircraft, the KC-390 is much more aesthetically beautiful. My opinion. Congratulations to both builders Kawasaki and Embraer.
both airplanes look very cool but the KC-390 looks a litle more mordern. Kawasaki C-2 reminds me a little of one c-17 when looking at the cockpit.
Kawasaki C2 is much larger aircraft and has better capability than KC 390; but it is correspondingly costlier. You get what you pay for, so both aircrafts are very competitive in their respective category.
obviously the C2 isnt that competitive
Tô assustado com a semelhança do molde das duas aeronaves 😮
c-2 is a bigger version of kawasaki c-1 which came out in the 1970s
Compare both airframes appearance to that of the C-17. They are both scaled down versions…
Belo vídeo! Não conhecia o seu canal! Você ganhou um inscrito direto do Brasil :)
The KC-390 is meant to replace the C-120. The C-2 is meant to life heavier. bulkier, cargos. The C-2 also has the range to fly fully loaded from Japan to Alaska or Hawaii unrefueled.
Duas excelentes aeronaves!👍
do you have any information regarding the fuel consumptions for each planes ? or perhaps i missed that
動画中の巡航距離の表記が間違っています。
動画中ではC2が8500km、KC390が9800kmと表記されていますが、これは逆です。
KC390は補助燃料タンク無しで6200km、タンク有りで8500kmの航続距離を誇ります。
対して、C2は補助燃料タンク無しで9800kmの航続距離となります。
The KC is made to take off and land from short unpaved runways. Hence the better flight charachteristics and less cargo.
It's also much cheaper.
Two great aircrafts. KC-390 is more flexible in terms of type of missions, it is cheaper to acquire, and cheaper to maintain. However C-2 has more capacity overall. The Japanese don't need to be jealous, there are Japanese descendant engineers at Embraer.
Huge opportunity for tying up of Embraer and Kawasaki and produce the Kw C-2 in numbers. Currently its potential is capped due to high unit & ops cost, small batches of JPN only order. Why not create a joint enterprise of their defense aerospace business and offer a true and capable competitor of A 400-M. And down the line, offer a scaled up version as replacement for C-17 Globemaster(lot of airframes will need to be shelved by existing customers in a decade or two so opportunities galore). That way, you have a true global airlifter giant offering at every payload class.
😂😂😂
日本にはkc399よりもKC-130の方が有用です。日本では内陸部より海上の任務がより多いので防錆対策が行われていないkc390では整備費用が大きく増えてしまいます。
THE KC-390 GETS MY VOTE
I would like to have a comparison with IL76 mainly in consume and price
The embraer can better fit most aircraft carriers and small airstrips, but the kawasaki will be more useful to most nations.
The embraer will not be able to land on any carrier…at least not more than once.
KC 390 is the best! Nice vídeo!
thank you
The KC 390 seems like a better buy, unless your cargo won't fit in the KC-390, then lower cost is meaningless.
Acho que não tem como comprá-los, pois são de categorias diferentes. Há enormes diferenças entre eles, inclusive no preço. Vantagens e desvantagens. No final não há um melhor e sim o mais adequado para a proposta de cada um.
Worth it buying 2 KC390 instead of buying a C2. Also KC390 can take off and land in shorter and earth runways, C2 can only land on asphalted runways.
The only real advantage of C2 over KC390 is its longer range.
In Japan, there are strict laws and regulations regarding both the military's activities outside its territory and the export of military aircraft, so domestically produced military aircraft are made with performance only suited to the activities of the Japanese military. Comparing these two machines is nonsense.
Diferente roles no?
Thanks for sharing. Just miseed the info about landing and take off distance
Due to the new deals with Saab, and the global logistic chain of Embraer; the the Kc390 is the most suitable for export
I like both aircraft. But I choose Kawasaki c2.
These small military cargo planes would be a replacement for what American equivalents? The C-130 Hercules?
I am a huge fan of embraer and kc390 is really a full multi task cargo plane perfect to substitute the hold c130. C2 also looks a pretty good plane, a bit bigger but with similar similar capabilities and so I think Embraer is first choice. Being the 3rd world manufacteur, Embraer will have a huge commercial advantage over Kawasaki but this is a different market.
Similar capabilities no. How many helicopter can transport the KC390? KC390 can compite with C130. The C2 is the similar capabilities of an M400 or AN70
@@ettorefieramosca5460 How many helicopter can transport the KC390? = It has already carried 1 Black Hawk, if we only carry the weight it can carry ~3, but the volume of the Helicopter and the available space means it can only carry 1 at a time
@@MilMI-24 ok so they don't have similar capabilities if the C2 comfortably carries 2 attack helicopters and has about 50% more cargo capacity and volume.
@@ettorefieramosca5460 Western standard attack helicopters are smaller than transport helicopters like the Black Hawk
Kc390 the best.
E por que você acha ele melhor??
@@FreeJackBR por que e aui
😄
Who's gonna buy C2
We can buy twice more of kc390 with same budget
@@sejin258094 as if ROKAF will buy either of C-2 or KC-390 as KAI is developing its own transport aircraft based on ROKAF's needs.
Sorry, but the C390 Milenium is here, flying, serving, already tested, already aproved, being sold all around and has many different tec advantages.
No comparition is possible.
KC390 is the best in its class!
Would be a good video if you used the universal metric scale rather than a local scale all countries have abandoned already.
Japan and Brazil have shared their aeroplane technology and blueprints on many model.
For example , Japan regional jet Mitsubishi MRJ is the same product as Brazil Embrae E-190.
And so on to this small transport plane.
Kind off
KC 390❤️👍👍👍👍👍🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷
"Kawasaki C-2" is a jet plane with the transport capacity more than the equal to A400M.
The flight path of "Kawasaki C-2" looks like a civil transport plane. It flies because at high speed over the upper sky of 12200m.
The minimum take off slide distance is 500m because there is a duty which takes off from the airport in the solitary island, too.
Kawasaki C-2 Embraer C-390 Millennium
Empty weight: 69,000[62] kg (152,119 lb) ?
Max takeoff weight: 141,400 kg (311,734 lb) Max takeoff weight: 86,999 kg (191,800 lb)
Cruise speed: 890 km/h (550 mph, 480 kn) / M0.8 Cruise speed: 870 km/h (540 mph, 470 kn) Mach 0.8
Ferry range: 9,800 km (6,100 mi, 5,300 nmi) Ferry range: normal ferry 3,310 nmi, 6,130 km; 8,500 km (5,300 mi, 4,600 nmi) max. with aux. fuel tanks;
Range: 7,600 km (4,700 mi, 4,100 nmi) with 20 t (20 long tons; 22 short tons) payload Range: 5,820 km (3,610 mi, 3,140 nmi) with 14,000 kg (30,865 lb) payload
Minimum takeoff distance: 500 m (1,641 ft) ?
Embraer is another category of tactical transport, similar to the C-130 Hercules, but the Kc 390 Millenium is modern and has greater capabilities.
Comes a new version partnered with USA (KC-390 Millennium Flying Boom) this version of supply Flying Boom. Soon the American force will buy many in the USAF air force.
The takeoff distance of the C-2 is 900m, right? His landing distance is 500m if I'm not mistaken
Kawasaki is so strong
Kawasaki é meu Paul
Different load. Different goals and solutions.
Almost different categories.
Brasil should manufacture and have both.
Kawasaki manufactures structures for several Embraer aircraft in Brazil.
A partnership would be a very good option .
Embraer, Kawasaki and KAI should be partners in a heavy weight cargo plane.
Ws// military analyst
Order of the Temple
The difference is that the KC-390 is an agility machine. Land any fucking place... 600 meters is enough for landing and takeoff. Brazilian masterpiece!
Two excellent aircraft. C2 is a bigger aircraft. Comparing both is not on an even playing field.
Kc 390 is more flexible, cheaper and less maintenance. Its sized to allow the flexibility.
does anyone know the drag polar of kawasaki c2?
These are both beautiful and remarkable
Since the c-2 is for Japan only, the manufacturing cost is high, so it is natural that it will be expensive!
Apples and oranges? It looks to me that these are different category planes. Why not go ahead and compare the KC-390 to the C-17 Globemaster?
Those airplanes seem designed for different kinds of operations, it is a matter of scale. The airplane KC-390 is destined to replace is the Hercules. The japanese Kawasaki C-2 looks like an airplane for more extensive operations with more troops and less discretion.
Both aircrafts in service together could make good sense for many operators.
C-2とKC-390を比べるのは、あまり意味がないと思います。貨物搭載量も航続距離も性能も全く異なるのですから。比べるなら、エアバスA-400Mが、良いでしょう。
Kawasaki C-2 it's more Smaller than the Boeing C-17 Globemaster?
C-17は完全装備の10式戦車を1両か16式機動戦闘車を2両空輸できるほど大きいですが、C-2は16式機動戦闘車を1両しか空輸できません。
The Kawasaki C-2 is in a different category, they don't compete in the same range. The Embraer plane is an excellent freighter, but has lower capacity and autonomy.
Hi from Brasil 🇧🇷 for EMBRAER
U$100mi to U$65illions thats a lot diff
KC-390 o melhor em sua categoria , muito tecnológico e versátil , um avião robusto , muito a frente de seus concorrentes, Parabéns ao BRAZIL e a Embraer !!!