Aircraft comparison Brazil's KC-390 vs Japan's Kawasaki C-2

The military cargo plane is an essential part of any country's defense because it assists in getting the troops and military equipment to the right places. These military cargo jets are now in demand from a number of countries.
We'll examine two different aircraft in this article: the Japanese-built Kawasaki C2 and the Brazilian-built Embraer KC 390. We will understand the technical characteristics of aircraft and their optimal flying and operational capabilities for military requirements. read more here jetlinemarvel.net/kc-390-vs-kawasaki-c-2/Aircraft comparison Brazil's KC-390 vs Japan's Kawasaki C-2
#KC390 #C2 #kawasaki #airplane
#c2kawasaki #Japan #cargoplane

[@RafaelOliveira-gl8jd]

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.

[@miraphycs7377]

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

[@user-kinshi]

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...

[@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn]

@@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!

[@user-kinshi]

@@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..

[@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn]

@@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!

[@edertonin9521]

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]

c-2 can take off and land in 500m. They also demonstrated capability use unpaved and semi-paved runways.

[@BaiacuGraphics]

@@miraphycs7377 But not from the Amazon, Pantanal or caatinga.

[@rusellgonzalez3564]

@@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.

[@grvc44]

@@BaiacuGraphics why would other countries fly into amazon?

[@alipiojr1]

yes

[@ettorefieramosca5460]

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.

[@darlanribeiro4692]

Kc390 is half the price of the Japanese model

[@ettorefieramosca5460]

@@darlanribeiro4692 ok. You pay less for less volume and less payload capacity.

[@Picanhadopapaimolusco]

​@@darlanribeiro4692 Prefiro o C-2, não gosto de lixo.

[@charlesbickford5167]

Amen!

[@gassyu764]

kc390 is the future of c130. C2 is a miniature of c17. different purpose. Both are great planes.

[@user-jf9ob5bl7h]

The concept of the C2 is to transport materials to the U.S. Army's Yakima Training Area, where 18 to 20 tons of materials will be transported 7,600 km using commercial routes of passenger aircraft. The altitude and speed are adapted to passenger aircraft to eliminate the need for special routing. The Embraer and C2 concepts are different.

[@franciscofernandes1839]

The KC 390 does all that too, the difference is that was designed to do all that on a short, unpaved track. It is a challenge that C2 cannot win.

[@user-jf9ob5bl7h]

@@franciscofernandes1839 The KC390 is too small to cross the Pacific Ocean and has a short range. The SDF will also be dissatisfied with the payload capacity.

[@franciscofernandes1839]

@@user-jf9ob5bl7h Yes, but the KC 390 can transport and supply fuel to another aircraft in mid-air.

[@user-jf9ob5bl7h]

@@franciscofernandes1839 Are you going to accompany a refueling plane to the middle of the Pacific Ocean? The C390's specs only allow it to fly 3000km (20t load). That would require two in-flight refueling flights. That's a lot less capability than you are asking for. Also, for a short period of time, the latest C130 is superior.

[@Balrov1]

Kawasaki is a bigger cargo plane and kc is a medium cargo plane. They are for different objectives...

[@lynda6338]

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.

[@eltonguimaraes7352]

kc 390 was designed for rapid transport of troops, vehicles and supplies, and in short runway locations.

[@jotajoee]

One of the items that matters most is the price, the kc390 is almost half the price!

[@nelsonsoutosouto2481]

Congratulations EMBRAER, KAWASAKI 🇧🇷🇯🇵

[@user-uk3mp7mf7u]

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.

[@AntonioRodrigues-qy6dk]

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.

[@Noob10068]

Po cara o Brasil foi reconhecido cara que lindo o Brasil foi reconhecido 😁😁😁😁

[@thesadsyt]

Isso tudo é apenas a realidade, o Brasil era pra estar muito mas avançando do que isso

[@swapnilp5774]

Both are great planes in their own category. The KC390 was exhibited recently at Aero India 2023.

[@99elasomon78]

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.

[@dibilidiot604]

An-148 or An-178 with KC-390. Ukrainians (now agrarian country) have done it a decade ago😂

[@zicachoque7282]

Voei no KC-390 , de Manaus até RORAIMA , FOI Showw.

[@frankyst3537]

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.

[@DenisSantanna-gw2dq]

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.

[@danielmartinezrueda]

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

[@fredf.7644]

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

[@danielcarvalho3122]

C-390 Millenium incrible

[@user-uk3mp7mf7u]

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.

[@victoralanjos]

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.

[@tempodofimmaciel6357]

Kc 390 foi projetado para pistas curtas e não pavimentadas ...São categorias diferentes

[@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn]

Além disso com o valor de um Cargueiro japonês consegue comprar quase dois KC 390 e sabemos que 2 são melhores que 1 kkkk...

[@gassyu764]

Agree. The kc390 is the future of the c130. C2 is a miniature of c17. different purpose. Both are great planes.

[@professormatheusmenezes1669]

@@VitoriaSantos-zw7gn boa kkkkkkkkkk

[@jaswindergalib]

Price difference is huge compared to compatibility if you buy 2 kc air craft then you can buy less price buy 3 Brazilian Aircraft

[@ubiratancardoso5923]

They seem to be both great an beautiful airplanes and hold excellence in their own weight category.

[@jamysalmeida18]

Brazil have a lot of short strips in amazon frontier, with 1400m long. The size of KC390 was planned for this.

[@linkme2dnet]

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).

[@Balrov1]

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.

[@fabioartner2794]

C-390 Millenium é espetacular!!👏👏👏

[@GrayWolf-pv5uj]

I love both aircraft.

[@MrMiyakojima]

KAWASAKI heavy industry makes aircrafts, Shinkansen(bullet trains),trains,ships,motor cycles.

[@saxon5637]

they are different products, the kc is a competitor of the c130

[@_021_henderson5]

Concorrente não, substituto. O 130 já é obsoleto e já está sendo substituído em quase todas as forças aereas

[@ren7a8ero]

Two impressive engineering works.

[@comentariosmemes]

You should compare, right?: KC-390 vs C-130J-30 or Kawasaki C2 vs Airbus A400M

[@AlexandreFontoura61]

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.

[@MultiCconway]

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.

[@luisabcouto]

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.

[@HanSoloRio]

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.

[@FairScale-tx1qv]

Do you believe the Japanese engineers would agree with your opinion?

[@StayHealthy363]

Kawasaki C2 is way more expansive than KC390. Kawasaki C2 makes no sense at 120 million dollar per aircarft.

[@fromfareastindy8234]

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.

[@douglas7347]

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.

[@NomadJB74]

@FromFarEast INDY were you trying to say only the US operates the C-17? If so, that is highly inaccurate

[@user-xl9qw7yk7c]

Lol smartest indian

[@Balangair1]

@@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.

[@waltersergio3032]

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

[@marcospauloss4238]

Biggest difference, the price.

[@ldesantan]

São diferentes em tamanho,peso, capacidades,uma comparação sem nexo,cada um feito pra uma necessidade....

[@stradivarioushardhiantz5179]

Just like comparing; 767-200 vs A321-200

[@waltersergio3032]

I agree entirely.

[@minhafamilianaamerica2305]

@@waltersergio3032 but which one is which?

[@waltersergio3032]

@@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.

[@jeffsong5653]

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.

[@donlee4105]

you were right. south korea chose kc390

[@rcesarcosta]

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.

[@pedrorequio5515]

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.

[@karelkubes4384]

Both aircrafts in service together could make good sense for many operators.

[@duanerice-mason2115]

THE KC-390 GETS MY VOTE

[@MovieSpottingBerlin]

Beide Modelle haben Vor- und Nachteile und beide haben ihre Daseinsberechtigung. Interessantes Video!

[@youcantata]

Major difference: cargo capacity and price: C-2: 35 ton US$95 million vs KC-390: 25 ton US $50 million.

[@LauroJoseSilva]

KC390 is the best in its class!

[@maximoyupanqui1482]

Necesidades de cada País , los Dos son 💪💯

[@gervasionascimento9698]

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

[@gervasionascimento9698]

@@powderorange rs

[@jcarlosferreira9657]

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".

[@ojorgeassis]

Belo vídeo! Não conhecia o seu canal! Você ganhou um inscrito direto do Brasil :)

[@antoniogomespereira6667]

Why compare these two aircrafts? Why not C2 vs A400? Or KC390 vs C130J?

[@falido_2442]

KC 390❤️👍👍👍👍👍🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷

[@fabios.253]

Both are great doing their job, but by the price of 1 C-2 you can get 3 (!) 390.

[@lucaswallace7476]

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.

[@ThiagoVksy]

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.

[@Pedro.Lustosa]

🇧🇷 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.

[@sparklestudios2083]

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.

[@TheWizardGamez]

obviously the C2 isnt that competitive

[@joxzoom]

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.

[@julionavas5626]

Thanks for sharing. Just miseed the info about landing and take off distance

[@user-jg4cb5ef7h]

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 !!!

[@curtmueller4627]

The KC 390 seems like a better buy, unless your cargo won't fit in the KC-390, then lower cost is meaningless.

[@joelsanagustin1473]

I like both aircraft. But I choose Kawasaki c2.

[@josenonato4283]

Duas excelentes aeronaves!👍

[@xiaomeinv7]

你确定？日本的c2就是工业垃圾

[@johnforsyth7987]

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.

[@robertolyra]

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.

[@linkme2dnet]

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.

[@IB-my8gx]

"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) ?

[@chii8900]

Embraer is another category of tactical transport, similar to the C-130 Hercules, but the Kc 390 Millenium is modern and has greater capabilities.

[@chii8900]

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.

[@nazarenogabriel5229]

Kc130 🇧🇷❤️🇦🇷

[@lorenzom.donatto]

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.

[@vaztion]

Due to the new deals with Saab, and the global logistic chain of Embraer; the the Kc390 is the most suitable for export

[@stein1385]

These are both beautiful and remarkable

[@ricardo.tecnicodoibge]

Kawasaki is so strong

[@edsonedi4942]

Kawasaki é meu Paul

[@drauzioabraz]

Lendo os comentário, tive a impressão que os japoneses não aceitam bem comparativos ou demonstram pouco apreço à informações que possam ameaçar ou equiparar-se à uma suposta "soberania"..Gostaria de salientar que a filosofia da industria brasileira à rigor é de atender mercado doméstico e países com similaridade de propósitos, principalmente a relação custo/benefício sem contudo subestimar a capacidade de seus concorrentes. Fala-se tanto na virtude da humildade do povo japonês, mas acabo questionando se este quesito alcança níveis da industria que exigem alta tecnologia! Lembrando que a maioria dos brasileiros são consumidores e profundos admiradores de produtos made-in-Japan. Ex. Honda, Toyota, Mitsubishi, considerados no Brasil como referência mundial em veículos de qualidade!

[@camaradacomissario9641]

Muito bem escrito o seu comentário, parabéns!

[@pedropain8529]

Hi from Brasil 🇧🇷 for EMBRAER

[@robertoaguiar6230]

The embraer can better fit most aircraft carriers and small airstrips, but the kawasaki will be more useful to most nations.

[@Bren39]

The embraer will not be able to land on any carrier…at least not more than once.

[@alexlo7708]

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.

[@notachannel4u]

Kind off

[@DLTNRDG]

Diferente roles no?

[@MrTribalsun]

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.

[@adalberto222]

Embraer kc 390 the best aircraft..

[@HermesHorus13]

Kc390 is the best one

[@andersondamasceno8443]

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!

[@ORINGBRASIL]

KC 390 is the best! Nice vídeo!

[@JetlineMarvel]

thank you

[@marcelomariano3586]

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.

[@ecmpinho]

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.

[@leexbf8693]

The C-2 is bigger and more powerful but the KC-390 is more efficient, best aerodynamic, more quick and have better economy

[@ciws8633]

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.

[@LooxJJ]

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.

[@frankmorgan2772]

U$100mi to U$65illions thats a lot diff

[@terra2jaquesmuller333]

Kc390 the best.

[@FreeJackBR]

E por que você acha ele melhor??

[@shelby6285]

@@FreeJackBR por que e aui

[@miisefabraziiian1002]

😄

[@sejin258094]

Who's gonna buy C2 We can buy twice more of kc390 with same budget

[@paulsteaven]

@@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.

[@tigeribaraki]

Since the c-2 is for Japan only, the manufacturing cost is high, so it is natural that it will be expensive!

[@Trazaluz]

Would be a good video if you used the universal metric scale rather than a local scale all countries have abandoned already.

[@ruisantos4520]

I would like to have a comparison with IL76 mainly in consume and price

[@henriquemonte4789]

If C-2 is heaviest and bigger than KC 390, it means that C-2 performance in difficult conditions is worst than KC 390 in those tough conditions. For instance, KC 390 would performe better than C-2 in Ukrainian soil in these spring raining times.

[@777RATINHO]

Braziliam aircraft is good.

[@ashgefuji]

Kawasaki is an international joint development partner for the V2500 engine, so the KC390 has Ninja blood .

[@alaquim2412]

Tô assustado com a semelhança do molde das duas aeronaves 😮

[@miraphycs7377]

c-2 is a bigger version of kawasaki c-1 which came out in the 1970s

[@MarcMcD]

Compare both airframes appearance to that of the C-17. They are both scaled down versions…

[@lucianorotolo9121]

Kc 390 é o primeiro orgulho do meu Brasil...impavudo colosso

[@HamzaKhan-bi4iq]

does anyone know the drag polar of kawasaki c2?

[@PedroSantos64]

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.

[@ettorefieramosca5460]

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

[@coriscotupi]

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.

[@marvinh4893]

i like the KC-390 because its a rly good plane and as one who is building for Embraer i stay behind my customer

[@brother_caio]

Kc390 cheaper, smaller and does the same job. Nice.

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

While both planes are beautiful the Embraer C-390 has success in the military cargo export market. While the Kawasaki C2 is only used at this time by Japan only. Breaking into the NATO market was also important.

[@Balrov1]

Too much US lobby, Brazil had Portugal to make an entrance in Nato market tho.. I also think a lot of the smaller Nato countries would also need a medium cargo plane than a big one because of the budget. c-390 was made exactly with the mindset to be an upgrade of c-130j And to the global military market the budget means a lot. C390 is that, is not a perfect supreme plane, it is perfect for his category and budget.

[@DeerShit01]

If you want to compare the KC390, I think you should compare it to the C-130J Super Herc, which is in the same class size. In that case, I think it would be evaluated as a good mid-size military cargo plane with enough competitiveness in terms of payload and price.