Due to some copyright issues, we had to remake and re-upload our Kawasaki P-1 video. We especially thank the Nigel Woolley (@NigelWoolleyaviation) and 山本一郎 (@ch-xv4jy) channels for allowing us to use its beautiful footage. www.youtube.com/@NigelWoolleyaviation www.youtube.com/@ch-xv4jy Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D.html Please click the link to watch our other Japanese Systems videos ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoGHZpbX_LShNT-UxMLomZJ.html Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Air videos ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LrGyENf3nqsYKC9ZkWH414k.html
12:38 The Philippines already dared to be the first country to buy Japanese defense equipment when they bought the Mitsubishi Electric J/FPS-3ME air search radars instead of making a repeat order of their existing Israeli radars. They're just radars, I know, but it's a great start for Japanese defense export.
Another wonderful and informative video about kawasaki P1.. Maritime patrol and antisubmarine warfare aircraft's for Japanese self-defense systems ...video clearly explained all characteristics of this indigenous aircraft....thank you ( weapon detective) channel for sharing...
I like it! Looks like they learned a lot from building their own P-3's. 4 Engines to get on station fast then cage 2 of them and loiter like crazy. Nice.
Turbofans can’t be “feathered” with the same degree of effect as turboprops because they become large air breaks. For example when a commercial jet has an engine failure their range is actually reduced as a) they have to fly at a lower altitude and b) the remaining engine(s) have to be run at a higher thrust to compensate for the loss of thrust and increased drag. The Kawasaki P1 and the P8 essentially have the same cruise speed, range, and loiter times. The real advantage the P-1 has is 9n the event of engine failure it can remain on station for a while whereas the P-8 needs to rtb however this is a minor issue as engine failures are rare. In short they’re both great platforms and I’m surprised other countries didn’t choose the P-1. They each have their pros and cons
An AWAC purposed Kawasaki P1 would be an excellent addition. The P1 would also make an excellent platform for ELINT/SIGINT purposed missions. The P1 is superior to the P8 in my opinion.
3 man crew? It has flight engineers? Also can be equipped with Type 17 anti-ship missiles it is the one photo you showed with the yellow body. Has much higher range than either Harpoon or Type 91. I personally prefer Japanese indiginous Kawasaki P-1 to the P-8 because it can carry more sonar buoy, ammunition, has a MAD sensor and four engines. I guess the only downsides are that it lacks aerial refueling capability, do not have the ability to command and operate anti-submarine drone (yet) and relatively low MTOW. Higher MTOW will allow it to carry even deadlier weapons possibly ASM-3.
the problem it seems with japan is they build excellent equipment but never in very large numbers, iam kind of suprised japan doesn't export any of their designs overseas.
the Kawasaki P-1 maritime multi mission ASW aircraft could do with a more streamlined fuselage & hybrid propulsion assist . . . in the interest of sustaining low operational costs . . . a stretched fuselage variant of the P-1 would be great though . . .
Japan should give one to the Ukraine. That way other countries would see how effective they are. The P1 is an excellent aircraft. However if attainability of spare parts and "customer support" has issues, that's a show stopper. This needs to be rectified before Japan is considered a viable source.
Without being any expert on the subject, it seems to me that the Japanese constitution and the successive governments are rather "restrictive" in all that concerns the military field. Which should not help much for export. Why did you choose Kawasaki rather than Boeing? Already to perpetuate a national aviation (in my opinion an important strategic choice). Then Boeing's troubles, quality problems (ranging from planes losing their operating authorization to the setbacks of their starliner space capsule, I believe) Then the scandal of the crazy over-billings of Boeing vis-à-vis Japan. Some might think that's a lot. Anyway thank you for this video it was very interesting.
Not sure being Boeing based is an advantage anymore. Boeing has its trouble due to getting too focused on military sales and not having an engineer leading the company.
Italy is actually considering the P1 among other competitors, like the P8 and the A330. The GCAP program and a certain synergy between Japanese and Italian programs (M346, C27J Kawasaki C2) could bring success to a potential sale
Congratulations on the video. I understand that another problem to sell the P-1 to NATO nations would be the certifications, which most probably should be paid by the purchasing country. That means a lot of time and money
I just like how beafy it looks. 4 engines. we all know its impractical. and statistically unlikely for a catastrophic engine failure to occur. but they still did it. its a beautiful craft
@@shanjida8353it’s not a redundancy issue, it’s that the P-8 is too low to the ground to accommodate the larger turbofans of a twinjet design. Turbofan failures are so rare it’s really not an issue. The P8 can fly on a single engine as long as there’s fuel in the tank.
I would argue about the maintainability benefits of the 737-based P-8 platform. Yes there have been 10,000 units of 737 produced over the years, but the latest versions share very little with earlier ones, and the P-8 airframe has little in common with the civilian 737 MAX. P-8 is a more common platform only in comparison to the boutique, very low production P-1 airframe, and this is the real problem with all Japanese-made weapon platforms. A comparison to South Korea is in order, because the ROK should have the same problems but has managed to overcome them and make large foreign sales of MBTs, SP howitzers and MLRS. The ROK is doing something right, perhaps related to policy on weapon technology exports.
Having a similar civillian airframe that is in use should still help with logistics and maintainability (even if it is just for newer fleets), as both will create demand for ongoing supplies of spare parts and their production. You're quite right, until recently Japan has forbidden arms exports (particularly to warzones), whereas the Republic of Korea has been actively searching for export partners and is also open to technology sharing with few demands. The South Koreans are going to be manufacturing their arms in Poland and Australia and transferring technology to companies in those countries.
But there is a differance is a differance.South korea maintains a big ground army so they produce a lots of armour even that is derivative.we are talking about aircraft here.besides in arms netwoks you need experiance and networks.south korea has exported weapons before but in this field japan is an infant in comparison .
P-1은 한국에서 P-8포세이돈의 강력한 경쟁자였습니다, 하지만 서플라이체인에서 해외실적이 없는 일본은 감점을 되었고 이에 따라 엔진이 4개인 점이 더욱 부각되어 재감점 되었습니다. The P-1 was a strong competitor for the P-8 Poseidon in Korea, but Japan, which has no overseas performance in the supply chain, was deducted, which further highlighted the fact that it had four engines.
"So far, Japan has maintained its position that the three principles under its war-renouncing Constitution ban lethal weapons exports, except for items jointly developed or produced with other countries, which can be transferred among them". A Quote from Kyodo news last month.
Do you read Thai or Mandarin or Malay or any other major Asian language? The Japanese have identified 12 fellow Asian nations that they'll be willing to sell their defence products to. The Japs will sell IF they deem we neighbours are in need of their weapons. So far they have transferred Navy ships to the Philippines and Coast Guard cutters to Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia. The Japs have ready transfer retired patrol aircraft to the Philippines.
bagongkelabu의 말이 옳다 , 도쿄는 2014년 무기수출 3원칙을 폐기하고 2015년부터 무기수출을 위해 최선을 다하고 있다. 그러나 레이더및 작은 규모의 성과는 있으나 핵심장비들은 아직 성과가 없다. Bagongkelabu is right, Tokyo abolished the three principles of arms exports in 2014 and has been doing its best to export weapons since 2015.However, while radar and etc. small-scale performance have been achieved, core equipment has yet to be accomplished.
Having 4 engines causing more disruption with sensors for detection from what UK trial found out thus UK went with more expensive P8. P1 also made an error with claim that S Korean destroyers used targeting radar on them when they were using detection radar to rescue N Korean fisherman.
four less powerful engines in a lighter body.the idea is same for p3 orion.3 engines are better than 2 engines.these planes go on long operations.on engine loss is a big problem in 2 engine aircraft it is a smaller problem it is has four engines.pretty easy.
It’s got 4 engines because it’s too low to the ground to accommodate the larger size turbofans necessary to have just 2 engines. Really if they were going with a 4 engine design I think turboprops might have been a better option.
Due to some copyright issues, we had to remake and re-upload our Kawasaki P-1 video.
We especially thank the Nigel Woolley (@NigelWoolleyaviation) and 山本一郎 (@ch-xv4jy) channels for allowing us to use its beautiful footage.
www.youtube.com/@NigelWoolleyaviation
www.youtube.com/@ch-xv4jy
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos
ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D.html
Please click the link to watch our other Japanese Systems videos
ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoGHZpbX_LShNT-UxMLomZJ.html
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Air videos
ua-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LrGyENf3nqsYKC9ZkWH414k.html
what has happened to the kawasaki C-1 and C-2 videos?
@@shazzatulanam6680 Thanks for your interest. Due to copyright issues, we had to remove them. We will remake them as soon as possible.
12:38 The Philippines already dared to be the first country to buy Japanese defense equipment when they bought the Mitsubishi Electric J/FPS-3ME air search radars instead of making a repeat order of their existing Israeli radars.
They're just radars, I know, but it's a great start for Japanese defense export.
I'm looking forward to seeing the success of the Japanese export defense market, they produce such interesting and underrated items
Thanks to remake this excellent video. I hope you will continue with others, like Jaguar, C-390, etc.
Another wonderful and informative video about kawasaki P1.. Maritime patrol and antisubmarine warfare aircraft's for Japanese self-defense systems ...video clearly explained all characteristics of this indigenous aircraft....thank you ( weapon detective) channel for sharing...
Very nice looking patrol aircraft, I was completely unaware of this.
The omission of the MAD on the Boeing P-8 gives the Kawaski P-1 the edge.
MAD sucks. It only really works directly overhead. You can achieve better results with sonar drops.
A crazy decision
The P1 is a great system. Japan can be proud.
The Japanese are masters of manipulation.
Great video. Have you covered the Wedgetail?
I like it! Looks like they learned a lot from building their own P-3's. 4 Engines to get on station fast then cage 2 of them and loiter like crazy. Nice.
Turbofans can’t be “feathered” with the same degree of effect as turboprops because they become large air breaks. For example when a commercial jet has an engine failure their range is actually reduced as a) they have to fly at a lower altitude and b) the remaining engine(s) have to be run at a higher thrust to compensate for the loss of thrust and increased drag.
The Kawasaki P1 and the P8 essentially have the same cruise speed, range, and loiter times. The real advantage the P-1 has is 9n the event of engine failure it can remain on station for a while whereas the P-8 needs to rtb however this is a minor issue as engine failures are rare.
In short they’re both great platforms and I’m surprised other countries didn’t choose the P-1. They each have their pros and cons
An AWAC purposed Kawasaki P1 would be an excellent addition. The P1 would also make an excellent platform for ELINT/SIGINT purposed missions. The P1 is superior to the P8 in my opinion.
Less known aircraft, at least in Europe, but really interesting video
3 man crew? It has flight engineers?
Also can be equipped with Type 17 anti-ship missiles it is the one photo you showed with the yellow body. Has much higher range than either Harpoon or Type 91.
I personally prefer Japanese indiginous Kawasaki P-1 to the P-8 because it can carry more sonar buoy, ammunition, has a MAD sensor and four engines. I guess the only downsides are that it lacks aerial refueling capability, do not have the ability to command and operate anti-submarine drone (yet) and relatively low MTOW. Higher MTOW will allow it to carry even deadlier weapons possibly ASM-3.
Japan did a great job. I'd give the P-1 the edge over the P-8.
The Japanese are masters of manipulation.
Attractive aircraft.
Good video.
Could we get a video about the German U212 class (plus export variants, future CD upgrade) next?
Thanks for your interest. We plan to make a video for the U212-class submarine by the end of this year.
Great looking plane.
the problem it seems with japan is they build excellent equipment but never in very large numbers, iam kind of suprised japan doesn't export any of their designs overseas.
Video on Embraer C390?
It will also be here soon
Video on the hawk light ground atack and trainer
Is this a re-upload?
I think I vaguely remember seeing this plane before.
Yes. Due to some copyright issues, we had to remake and re-upload our Kawasaki P-1 video.
日米でP1と米機を潜水艦探知な競争演習をやって見るとその時能力の差異が判り面白いのでは？
After the Nimrod MRA4 debacle it would have been great to see this in the UK
the Kawasaki P-1 maritime multi mission ASW aircraft could do with a more streamlined fuselage & hybrid propulsion assist . . . in the interest of sustaining low operational costs . . . a stretched fuselage variant of the P-1 would be great though . . .
Can you do a video on the AMX 30 tank
Japan should give one to the Ukraine. That way other countries would see how effective they are. The P1 is an excellent aircraft. However if attainability of spare parts and "customer support" has issues, that's a show stopper. This needs to be rectified before Japan is considered a viable source.
Is this a reupload?
Yes. Due to some copyright issues, we had to remake and re-upload our Kawasaki P-1 video.
Without being any expert on the subject, it seems to me that the Japanese constitution and the successive governments are rather "restrictive" in all that concerns the military field.
Which should not help much for export.
Why did you choose Kawasaki rather than Boeing?
Already to perpetuate a national aviation (in my opinion an important strategic choice).
Then Boeing's troubles, quality problems (ranging from planes losing their operating authorization to the setbacks of their starliner space capsule, I believe)
Then the scandal of the crazy over-billings of Boeing vis-à-vis Japan.
Some might think that's a lot.
Anyway thank you for this video it was very interesting.
Not sure being Boeing based is an advantage anymore. Boeing has its trouble due to getting too focused on military sales and not having an engineer leading the company.
Italy is actually considering the P1 among other competitors, like the P8 and the A330. The GCAP program and a certain synergy between Japanese and Italian programs (M346, C27J Kawasaki C2) could bring success to a potential sale
Shukriya
Congratulations on the video. I understand that another problem to sell the P-1 to NATO nations would be the certifications, which most probably should be paid by the purchasing country. That means a lot of time and money
a tailored three engine platform could make it better. it is not late for it.
Don't mention the expensive debacle of the British Nimrod MR4.
I just like how beafy it looks. 4 engines. we all know its impractical. and statistically unlikely for a catastrophic engine failure to occur. but they still did it. its a beautiful craft
Its actually more paratical.redundency.
@@shanjida8353it’s not a redundancy issue, it’s that the P-8 is too low to the ground to accommodate the larger turbofans of a twinjet design.
Turbofan failures are so rare it’s really not an issue. The P8 can fly on a single engine as long as there’s fuel in the tank.
10:42 Thailand actually buys a lot of Chinese weapons nowadays, arguably more than Western weapons. You may actually want to do some research on that.
Two stroke or four stroke???? 😅
and now, Japan has decided to retire and replace it with drones. When exactly, it hasn't said.
機体フレームにヒビが有り、Xの時は、散々で読売新聞にも一面で叩かれた機体。P8との共通点は完全収納式の階段。機体動翼のリベットについてかしめる点が指先しか入らない点があり、一部の製造者にしか上手く仕上げられな無い箇所が有る。主脚構造も複雑で、整備に難点が多い。センスの無い技士が思考したものは、日本でしか通用しない機体。量産や海外生産など、一見すると、輸送機と共通部を使い先進性有るように見えるが、世界に売るとなるとまた別の次元になる。両機とも開発期間や掛けた金を見ても成功した技術や機体とは言えない。
アメリカや政治の圧が無ければ、P3では無く、P2Jの後は、既にジェットだった。今回のP1はいわば企業技術者の欲と過去へのオマージュ。
潜水艦問題で大変な事件を起こした会社で、航空部門でも、元自衛官を斡旋就職させて、何か買って貰う為には手段を選ばない悪質な会社。それが川崎。
I would argue about the maintainability benefits of the 737-based P-8 platform. Yes there have been 10,000 units of 737 produced over the years, but the latest versions share very little with earlier ones, and the P-8 airframe has little in common with the civilian 737 MAX. P-8 is a more common platform only in comparison to the boutique, very low production P-1 airframe, and this is the real problem with all Japanese-made weapon platforms. A comparison to South Korea is in order, because the ROK should have the same problems but has managed to overcome them and make large foreign sales of MBTs, SP howitzers and MLRS. The ROK is doing something right, perhaps related to policy on weapon technology exports.
Having a similar civillian airframe that is in use should still help with logistics and maintainability (even if it is just for newer fleets), as both will create demand for ongoing supplies of spare parts and their production. You're quite right, until recently Japan has forbidden arms exports (particularly to warzones), whereas the Republic of Korea has been actively searching for export partners and is also open to technology sharing with few demands. The South Koreans are going to be manufacturing their arms in Poland and Australia and transferring technology to companies in those countries.
But there is a differance is a differance.South korea maintains a big ground army so they produce a lots of armour even that is derivative.we are talking about aircraft here.besides in arms netwoks you need experiance and networks.south korea has exported weapons before but in this field japan is an infant in comparison .
P-1은 한국에서 P-8포세이돈의 강력한 경쟁자였습니다, 하지만 서플라이체인에서 해외실적이 없는 일본은 감점을 되었고 이에 따라 엔진이 4개인 점이 더욱 부각되어 재감점 되었습니다.
The P-1 was a strong competitor for the P-8 Poseidon in Korea, but Japan, which has no overseas performance in the supply chain, was deducted, which further highlighted the fact that it had four engines.
Japan is not allowed to sell military hardware to anyone.
Hogwash. Japan made changes to their laws allowing them to do so.
"So far, Japan has maintained its position that the three principles under its war-renouncing Constitution ban lethal weapons exports, except for items jointly developed or produced with other countries, which can be transferred among them". A Quote from Kyodo news last month.
Do you read Thai or Mandarin or Malay or any other major Asian language? The Japanese have identified 12 fellow Asian nations that they'll be willing to sell their defence products to. The Japs will sell IF they deem we neighbours are in need of their weapons. So far they have transferred Navy ships to the Philippines and Coast Guard cutters to Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia. The Japs have ready transfer retired patrol aircraft to the Philippines.
bagongkelabu의 말이 옳다 , 도쿄는 2014년 무기수출 3원칙을 폐기하고 2015년부터 무기수출을 위해 최선을 다하고 있다.
그러나 레이더및 작은 규모의 성과는 있으나 핵심장비들은 아직 성과가 없다.
Bagongkelabu is right, Tokyo abolished the three principles of arms exports in 2014 and has been doing its best to export weapons since 2015.However, while radar and etc. small-scale performance have been achieved, core equipment has yet to be accomplished.
Having 4 engines causing more disruption with sensors for detection from what UK trial found out thus UK went with more expensive P8. P1 also made an error with claim that S Korean destroyers used targeting radar on them when they were using detection radar to rescue N Korean fisherman.
Kawasaki is a motorcycle.
Kawasaki makes lots of stuff, not just motorcycles.
Wtf! Having 4 engines on such a small plane seems inefficient AF!!!
four less powerful engines in a lighter body.the idea is same for p3 orion.3 engines are better than 2 engines.these planes go on long operations.on engine loss is a big problem in 2 engine aircraft it is a smaller problem it is has four engines.pretty easy.
It’s got 4 engines because it’s too low to the ground to accommodate the larger size turbofans necessary to have just 2 engines.
Really if they were going with a 4 engine design I think turboprops might have been a better option.