# China unveils world's largest amphibious aircraft



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 24, 2016)

China has completed production of the world's largest amphibious aircraft which will be used to fight forest fires and perform marine rescues.

The aircraft, dubbed the AG600, is around the size of a Boeing 737 - far larger than any other plane built to take off and land on water.

It has a maximum flight range of 2,800 miles and can collect 12 tonnes of water in 20 seconds. Its maximum take-off weight of 53.5 tonnes.

The state-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China unveiled the first of the new planes on Saturday in the southern port city of Zhuhai.







The Chinese plane, which is targeted at the domestic market, will be 'very useful in developing and exploiting marine resources,' local media reported, adding that it could be used for 'environmental monitoring, resource detection and transportation'.

AVIC deputy general manager, Geng Rugang, said the plane was 'the latest breakthrough in China's aviation industry.' A plan for the development and production of the AG600 received government approval in 2009.















_Data from_ AerospaceTechnology.com, Popular Science, Flight Global, Guo and militaryfactory.com

*General characteristics*


*Capacity:* 50 passengers
*Length:* 40 m (131 ft 3 in)
*Wingspan:* 40 m (131 ft 3 in)
*Max takeoff weight:* 53,500 kg (117,947 lb)
*Powerplant:* 4 × WJ-6 turboprops, 3,805 kW (5,103 hp) each
*Propellers:* 4-bladed constant speed propellers
*Performance*


*Maximum speed:* 570 km/h (354 mph; 308 kn)
*Range:* 5,500 km (3,418 mi; 2,970 nmi)
*Service ceiling:* 10,500 m (34,449 ft)


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 24, 2016)

Funny voice in the video, sounds like they used google translate audio


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 24, 2016)

Wonder if they'll find international buyers for it.

The problem with bottom scoop aircraft like this is they need a large body of water to safely scoop.  Bigger is not necessarily better because it translates to needing a larger body of water.

That said, it's sad seaplanes have been going away.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 24, 2016)

I Humbly beg to DIFFER
Chinese propaganda at work
wilki
*Specifications (H-4)*
_Performance specifications are projected._





Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major engine
*General characteristics*


*Crew:* three
*Length:* 218 ft 8 in (66.65 m)
*Wingspan:* 320 ft 11 in (97.54 m)
*Height:* 79 ft 4 in (24.18 m)
*Fuselage height:* 30 ft (9.1 m)
*Empty weight:* 250,000 lb (113,399 kg)
*Loaded weight:* 400,000 lb (180,000 kg)
*Powerplant:* 8 × Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major radial engines, 3,000 hp (2,640 kW) each
*Propellers:* four-bladed Hamilton Standard, prop, one per engine
*Propeller diameter:* 17 ft 2 in (5.23 m)

*Performance*


*Cruise speed:* 250 mph (407.98 km/h)
*Range:* 3,000 mi (4,800 km)
*Service ceiling:* 20,900 ft (6,370 m)
The chinese must have recently hacked Hughs corp for the spruce goose blueprints and.............


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 24, 2016)

dorsetknob said:


> I Humbly beg to DIFFER
> Chinese propaganda at work
> wilki
> *Specifications (H-4)*
> ...





Naah

Spruce Goose flew once.....and recent thinking suggests that was only possible through "ground effect".


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 24, 2016)

It Still flew and above spec's show its bigger 

Howard Hughs was instructed to only perform taxi trials and "Smirk" thats all he was supposed to perform
A little to much throttle and it cruised for about a mile in the air ( yes that was ground effect in Action ) he never was given the chance of FULL FLIGHT TRIALS
but yes it Did Fly


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 24, 2016)

amphibious
amˈfɪbɪəs/
_adjective_

relating to, living in, or suited for both land and water.
"an amphibious vehicle"



I rest my case.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 24, 2016)

This is competing with the Bombardier CL-415 which is a significantly smaller plane.





Hughes H-4 Hercules wasn't designed to be a firefighter like these are.  It was a heavy lift aircraft where runways aren't available.

Howard Hughes deliberately took off with it even when he was ordered not to.  People were slandering him and his plane and he set out to prove them wrong.

Hercules couldn't land on, well, land, at all.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 24, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I rest my case.



May i point out to Mu' laud
His Evidence is Flawed and despite the Title his Evidence does clash and contradict  with thread title








*China Builds World's Largest Seaplane *

PS i'm applying for summary judgment and costs in my favour


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 24, 2016)

It's not the largest seaplane because H-4 Hercules is bigger.
It is the largest amphibious plane because, unlike H-4 Hercules, it can land on sea and ground.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 24, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's not the largest seaplane because H-4 Hercules is bigger.


My point exactly


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 24, 2016)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Bloody pedant.........ASBO time...


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 24, 2016)

Since when does China not steal thunder from others?


----------



## D007 (Jul 25, 2016)

Why isn't "putting out fires" on the top of this list? lol


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 25, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> China has completed production of the world's largest amphibious aircraft which will be used to fight forest fires and perform marine rescues.




Of the 2 uses listed, fighting fires was first.


I  didnt add the third possible use...........anti-sub warfare.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 25, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I didnt add the third possible use...........anti-sub warfare.


 another possibility is Air Transportation to and from those New Islands that seem to be appearing in the south China Sea's
not all are yet big enough for a Land based Runway to be Built


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 25, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I  didnt add the third possible use...........anti-sub warfare.





dorsetknob said:


> another possibility is Air Transportation to and from those New Islands that seem to be appearing in the south China Sea's
> not all are yet big enough for a Land based Runway to be Built


When I first saw it posted, these are exactly the things I read in between the lines.  I'm not really concerned about the former (namely because US subs are badass) but the latter is likely the motivation for China commissioning it.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 25, 2016)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> Since when does China not steal thunder from others?



Before they were brainwashed by the Soviets? If I recall correctly during most of human history Chinese technology and civilization are superior than Western society. However after soviets took over and Mao wiped the entire history of China it is the sad state we see today.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 25, 2016)

The dynasty system collapsed (1912) before the Soviets rose to power (1922).  It was basically chaos (civil war, foreign meddling, imperialist pressures, etc.) in China between 1912 and 1949 when the communists seized control (undoubtedly with some Soviet aid or at least influence).  China had some major inventions (like gunpowder) before the West did but these happened long before this period in history.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 25, 2016)

dorsetknob said:


>


Is that thing made out of Bamboo? 
Radar will have trouble picking it up ....


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 25, 2016)

Sad to see people on tech site so narrow minded. Not everything made in China is junk. Gotta admit the media's brain washing is pretty powerful.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 25, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> Sad to see people on tech site so narrow minded. Not everything made in China is junk. Gotta admit the media's brain washing is pretty powerful.


There two sides here, its not narrow minded because China is also known for cloning everything and turning it into an abortion. There is yin and yang in China you cannot just pick a side and say the other doesnt exsist, that makes you narrow minded as well.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 28, 2016)

The world's biggest water bomber – with a 200-foot wing span wider than a 747 jumbo jet and the ability to carry 7200 gallons of water.

FOR SALE
£3 million















According to the EAA, the plane is the last of its kind after only six of the Martin JRM Mars seaplanes were made for the US Navy during the Second World War.

They were built as long-range troop and freight transport to fly between Hawaii and the mainland United States.

But they were later converted to water bombers and given the ability to carry enough water to cover 4 acres of land in a single pass.


*HOW DOES IT DO IT*

The Captain executes a normal landing, keeps the the aircraft 'on the step' and allows the speed to decrease to 70 knots.

He then passes engine power to the Flight Engineer and selects the scoops to the 'down' position.

The ram pressure for injecting the water into the tanks is such that the aircraft is taking on water at a rate in excess of a ton per second. To account for this added weight, the Flight Engineer must advance the throttles to maintain a skimming speed of 60-70 knots to ensure the aircraft remains on the step.

Pickup time is, on average, 25 seconds. When the tanks are full, the Captain will have the scoops raised, call for takeoff power from the Flight Engineer and carry out a normal loaded takeoff.

Once airborne, the foam concentrate is injected into the water load (normally, 30 US gallons of concentrate into the 7,200 US gallon water load) where it is dispersed and remains inert until the load is dropped.

Once dropped, the tumbling action causes expansion which converts the water load into a foam load. This process is repeated for each drop.

















Many thanks to @jboydgolfer 's production company for making the vid......


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 28, 2016)

Mine is bigger!


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 28, 2016)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> There two sides here, its not narrow minded because China is also known for cloning everything and turning it into an abortion. There is yin and yang in China you cannot just pick a side and say the other doesnt exsist, that makes you narrow minded as well.



Reading comprehension, he clearly said "not everything made in china is junk".
"not everything is junk" does not mean "Not everything is junk therefor everything is great and perfect and flawless"

Not everything is junk means that they do also make really good products and that is simply true, "made in china" nowadays has some negative connotation because of dumbasses, when 99% of what you use is made in China.
Also China's copying is getting better and better and better, I would highly recommend you watch Top Gear's China episode where they specifically focus on the car industry in China and how it evolved over time, credit where credit is due.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 28, 2016)

dorsetknob said:


> It Still flew and above spec's show its bigger
> 
> Howard Hughs was instructed to only perform taxi trials and "Smirk" thats all he was supposed to perform
> A little to much throttle and it cruised for about a mile in the air ( yes that was ground effect in Action ) he never was given the chance of FULL FLIGHT TRIALS
> but yes it Did Fly



You read my mind.  Chinese propaganda at work.  This may be the largest amphibious aircraft now, but not EVER.  Spruce Goose was larger.  And, looking at this thing, I'm going to search because I can vaguely think of one or two others that were bigger as well.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 28, 2016)

This aircraft is AMPHIBIOUS.

The Spruce Goose was not an amphibious aircraft.




EDIT.......Search


Seaplane
Flying Boat
Amphibious Aircraft

They are all different aircraft types


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 28, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> This aircraft is AMPHIBIOUS.
> 
> The Spruce Goose was not an amphibious aircraft.


Correct, the Spruce Goose was a sea plane, it could not travel on or land on a runway.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 28, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> it could not travel on or land on a runway.




and could barely travel in air..........it was however quite an effective winged boat.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 28, 2016)

ZoneDymo said:


> Reading comprehension, he clearly said "not everything made in china is junk".
> "not everything is junk" does not mean "Not everything is junk therefor everything is great and perfect and flawless"



Speaking of reading comprehension, I was talking about being narrow minded in respect to being opening minded about China's products. To put it in English you can understand, you have to take the good with the bad, but to say everything is only good is wrong too. In essence, I was agreeing with him. SSTUYAASI 



ZoneDymo said:


> Not everything is junk means that they do also make really good products and that is simply true, "made in china" nowadays has some negative connotation because of dumbasses, when 99% of what you use is made in China.
> Also China's copying is getting better and better and better, I would highly recommend you watch Top Gear's China episode where they specifically focus on the car industry in China and how it evolved over time, credit where credit is due.


The "made in china" negative connotation has history behind it, that reputation was well earned in the past, that doesnt mean it didnt change. It did, China has improved its reputation with better quality products.  But you cant convince everyone to drop the negativity, some people look at that "made in China" label as a loss of jobs in the USA so will never give up those hard feelings and attitudes. Yea its shame but what can you do. eh? 

Its like going to bat in the bottom of the 9th with 2 outs, if you hit a home run, you're a Hero, if not, you're a dud. If this plane can save a bunch of trees, its a win-win.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 29, 2016)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> Speaking of reading comprehension, I was talking about being narrow minded in respect to being opening minded about China's products. To put it in English you can understand, you have to take the good with the bad, but to say everything is only good is wrong too. In essence, I was agreeing with him. SSTUYAASI
> 
> 
> The "made in china" negative connotation has history behind it, that reputation was well earned in the past, that doesnt mean it didnt change. It did, China has improved its reputation with better quality products.  But you cant convince everyone to drop the negativity, some people look at that "made in China" label as a loss of jobs in the USA so will never give up those hard feelings and attitudes. Yea its shame but what can you do. eh?
> ...



I know what you were trying to say, but you worded it as a counter when there was nothing to counter.
Ill have to repeat myself, all he said was "not everything in China is junk" that automatically means that there is variation in the quality of products (not everything is junk, not everything is great, not everything is average) so your comment of how not everything is good either is completely redundant and shows a lack of understanding of the statement OP made.
You attached a value to "not everything is junk" that isn't there, the "but to say everything is only good is wrong too." is something you read into his statement, which was not there and that is why you need to work on reading comprehension.

On the second part, which is why I said 99% of what you use is made in China, its incredibly short sighted to give China's product any kind of reputation as some general consensuses.
China is gigantic and makes 99% of what you use, all that stuff nobody ever pays mind to because it just works? yeah, made in China, but when one of your many many Chinese products finally fails its something you notice because the made in China keeps coming up because, again, EVERYTHING YOU OWN is made in the China.
If your American drill bit breaks you wont over time lose faith in American products because less then 1% of your products are from America so its no repeating pattern.
Its all about scale and people not realizing that because...well...they are stupid.


----------



## Jetster (Jul 29, 2016)

Largest? I don't think so. Okay it wasn't amphibious  320Ft wing span though

http://www.evergreenmuseum.org/the-spruce-goose


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 29, 2016)

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh...........

LARGEST AMPHIBIOUS



NOT largest ever, or even the ONLY amphibious.

As the title says    "Worlds largest amphibious aircraft   "





for comparison here are some small aircraft, none of which are amphibious

http://jalopnik.com/the-ten-smallest-human-operated-aircraft-ever-to-fly-1736381580


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 29, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Seaplane
> Flying Boat
> Amphibious Aircraft


Actually...

Seaplane - fixed wing aircraft that can land on water.
Floatplane - Weight is predominantly suspended above floats.
Flying Boat - The fuselage is mostly in the water.

Amphibious - Meets the requirements for seaplanes and is also capable of terrestrial landing.  There are amphibious float planes (wheels deploy out of the floats) and amphibious flying boats (like this Chinese aircraft).


----------



## Jetster (Jul 29, 2016)

So just belly landing doesn't count?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 29, 2016)

In summary.



This Chinese plane is f*****g amphibious and Spruce Goose is a f*****g flying boat.


----------



## Jetster (Jul 29, 2016)

calm down I get it. It was a mistake


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jul 29, 2016)

Jetster said:


> calm down I get it. It was a mistake




LMFAO.....ta


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 29, 2016)

Jetster said:


> So just belly landing doesn't count?


That would be a crash landing.  Situations where aircraft fail to deploy landing gear for terrestrial landing are treated as crash landings too.  They put a bed of foam out to reduce the resistance but it's never a good situation especially if there isn't room beyond the runway for it to safely come to a stop.

And Sully Sullenberger  is a hero.  Water landings with non-seaplanes is a really, really, really bad situation.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Aug 1, 2016)

VTOL, Amphibious, Russian......not especially big though....

*Bartini Beriev VVA-14*
*



*
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartini_Beriev_VVA-14

*


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Aug 1, 2016)

That defies classification.  It doesn't have landing gear from what I can tell but it can still land on ground because of its ridiculously big floats and VTOL capability.  It is technically amphibious but it really doesn't fit in that broad of a category.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Aug 1, 2016)

It falls into the category of a ground effect aircraft. They never managed the VTOL bit.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle#Ekranoplan_wing


Heres the biggest one...until im proved wrong of course....












Here is the largest STOL aircraft


----------



## cornemuse (Aug 1, 2016)

This 'boat' will fit nicely in chine plans within their "nine dash line" hegemony scheme in the south china sea, , , ,


----------



## dorsetknob (Aug 1, 2016)

cornemuse said:


> This 'boat' will fit nicely in chine plans within their "nine dash line" hegemony scheme in the south china sea, , , ,


As mentioned in post 16 and 17 



dorsetknob said:


> another possibility is Air Transportation to and from those New Islands that seem to be appearing in the south China Sea's
> not all are yet big enough for a Land based Runway to be Built





FordGT90Concept said:


> When I first saw it posted, these are exactly the things I read in between the lines. I'm not really concerned about the former (namely because US subs are badass) but the latter is likely the motivation for China commissioning it.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 10, 2018)

AG600, the world's largest amphibious aircraft in production, took to the skies on Sunday for its maiden flight.

The plane, codenamed 'Kunlong' according to state news agency Xinhua, took off from the southern city of Zhuhai and landed after roughly an hour-long flight.

With a wingspan of 38.8 metres (127 feet) and powered by four turboprop engines, the aircraft is capable of carrying 50 people and can stay airborne for 12 hours.





















https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVIC_AG600


----------

