Nanchang CJ-6
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Under the wing, asleep.
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nanchang CJ-6
I've had the severe good fortune to land a job-on-the-side flying one of these magnificent machines. Consequently I've been googling away learning more and more about them, including the fact that they could be armed and used as a light (very light I presume) attack aircraft.
Can anyone point me in the right direction to find out if the 'Chang' was ever used in anger?
Cheers.
Can anyone point me in the right direction to find out if the 'Chang' was ever used in anger?
Cheers.
The first time I saw a Nanchang 6 was about 1998. I was in a city in west Sichuan where the military airfield was starting to be joint civil use. The terminal building was just a shed and to get to it one had to be driven around the perimeter track.
Half way around we came to a line of Nanchang 6s. The first one was in a shocking state; the canopy was crazed and yellow, tyres flat and the fabric on the elevators had partially rotted away. The second wasn't a lot better.
I thought then that these aircraft could find a good home in the UK where they could be rebuilt.
The third was complete apart from an engine cowl and the one after at least had its tyres inflated. We then got to several that had drip trays underneath and eventually we came to three that were fully covered, complete with wing cuffs.
It became apparent that that the wrecks were Xmas trees and the covered ones were awaiting their turn to fly. There was a sign by the buildings that indicated that it was an Air Force training school which indicated their role.
Subsequently I visited more military and military/civil bases and the same procedure seemed to be universal, even on front line operational stations. Some of them had their previous equipment parked in rows on the side.
Never saw or heard about the Nanchang being equipped or used as armed aircraft
Half way around we came to a line of Nanchang 6s. The first one was in a shocking state; the canopy was crazed and yellow, tyres flat and the fabric on the elevators had partially rotted away. The second wasn't a lot better.
I thought then that these aircraft could find a good home in the UK where they could be rebuilt.
The third was complete apart from an engine cowl and the one after at least had its tyres inflated. We then got to several that had drip trays underneath and eventually we came to three that were fully covered, complete with wing cuffs.
It became apparent that that the wrecks were Xmas trees and the covered ones were awaiting their turn to fly. There was a sign by the buildings that indicated that it was an Air Force training school which indicated their role.
Subsequently I visited more military and military/civil bases and the same procedure seemed to be universal, even on front line operational stations. Some of them had their previous equipment parked in rows on the side.
Never saw or heard about the Nanchang being equipped or used as armed aircraft
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 3rd May 2013 at 08:48.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Asia's Fine City
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's one - but it's in NZ so the underwing stores are probably beer kegs.
Kiwi Aircraft Images : wancj6e : Photo Page
Great aircraft to fly and wonderfully aerobatic.
Kiwi Aircraft Images : wancj6e : Photo Page
Great aircraft to fly and wonderfully aerobatic.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the CJ-6 a Chinese licence-built version of a Yak(52)?
Two minutes later: just had a look at one of my own photos, taken in China and I think I've answered my own question, tho this is-I understand-a CJ-5: DSC_0119 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Two minutes later: just had a look at one of my own photos, taken in China and I think I've answered my own question, tho this is-I understand-a CJ-5: DSC_0119 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Last edited by Proplinerman; 5th May 2013 at 20:34.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Under the wing, asleep.
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the CJ-6 a Chinese licence-built version of a Yak(52)?
Meanwhile in Mother Russia, the Yak-18 was developed into the tri-gear Yak-18a. The '52 looks like a clean sheet design, but again, using a lot of systems of the 18a.
This is just what I've gleaned from a few hours internetting. I'm sure others can correct me or fill in the blanks.
Back on topic - I can't find the link, but I recall reading the CJ-6 used in a border-protection type role. Wikipedia (i know
) does list a few armaments.
Here's one - but it's in NZ so the underwing stores are probably beer kegs.
Thanks for the input guys.
Last edited by Wanderin_dave; 6th May 2013 at 00:20.
A nice photo here showing the two in formation:
Crosswind Images | Warbirds & Classics | Nanchang CJ-6 and YAK 52
The big differences are the dihedral on the outer wing panels of the CJ-6, giving it a slightly gull-winged appearance and the squared-off fin and rudder. The bubble canopy of the the CJ-6 in this photo is non-standard.
Crosswind Images | Warbirds & Classics | Nanchang CJ-6 and YAK 52
The big differences are the dihedral on the outer wing panels of the CJ-6, giving it a slightly gull-winged appearance and the squared-off fin and rudder. The bubble canopy of the the CJ-6 in this photo is non-standard.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Asia's Fine City
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and that ‘chang has a strange protuberance on its belly as well – too many beans perhaps? 
The Yak’s dangly undercarriage although very practical does spoil its looks IMO.
The Nanchang usually looks far more elegant and its faster too.
The Yak’s dangly undercarriage although very practical does spoil its looks IMO.
The Nanchang usually looks far more elegant and its faster too.
Last edited by kluge; 6th May 2013 at 03:20.
The Yak’s dangly undercarriage although very practical does spoil its looks IMO.
What you do see are the multitude of rivets on the wing! Designed for strength!
I am thinking about buying one of these aircraft here in Oz.
Can anyone offer any experiences owning them both good and bad?
What should one look out for in pre purchase inspection and what questions to ask perculiar to the type?
Thanks!
Can anyone offer any experiences owning them both good and bad?
What should one look out for in pre purchase inspection and what questions to ask perculiar to the type?
Thanks!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a share in a '52 for a few years and it was great fun! Aerobatically unlimited with lots of power, but it's a big heavy beast.
Parts (including new engines and props) were cheap as chips, but the fuel consumption was horrific by light aircraft standards! It was very well built and rarely failed, except the air start system which invariably leaked if the aircraft hadn't flown for a while, leaving insufficient air for a start-up.
The '52 has some interesting spin characteristics and will readliy flick if you are even a bit out of balance. Anyone not used to such a beast really needs a throughough check out with someone who really knows the aeroplane. I had a session with Gennedy Elfimov and learned a heck of a lot even though I'd had a lengthy check out and conversion to type by an experienced Yak pilot.
It's the easiest aeroplane to land that I have ever flown - does it itself, really. As long as you remember to lower the gear - a lot of '52s have been landed gear-up as it's very easy to do. Ours was (not by me!) and that precipitated the end of our group.
I went back to the Chipmunk, which while only a fraction as aerobatically able as the '52 is actually nicer to fly!
Parts (including new engines and props) were cheap as chips, but the fuel consumption was horrific by light aircraft standards! It was very well built and rarely failed, except the air start system which invariably leaked if the aircraft hadn't flown for a while, leaving insufficient air for a start-up.
The '52 has some interesting spin characteristics and will readliy flick if you are even a bit out of balance. Anyone not used to such a beast really needs a throughough check out with someone who really knows the aeroplane. I had a session with Gennedy Elfimov and learned a heck of a lot even though I'd had a lengthy check out and conversion to type by an experienced Yak pilot.
It's the easiest aeroplane to land that I have ever flown - does it itself, really. As long as you remember to lower the gear - a lot of '52s have been landed gear-up as it's very easy to do. Ours was (not by me!) and that precipitated the end of our group.
I went back to the Chipmunk, which while only a fraction as aerobatically able as the '52 is actually nicer to fly!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KENT, UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What should one look out for in pre purchase inspection and what questions to ask peculiar to the type?
Having just spent three years rebuilding one of these aircraft, (G-CGHB) i find myself well placed as to comment on what to look for on a pre-buy inspection.
These aircraft suffer with cracking on the tailplane spars, The cracks are located on the carry through section of the spar, above the tailcone. The UK CAA introduced an MPD for this subject which can be found on the CAA website.
There is a repair scheme for this cracking, but in the worst case scenario you will be looking at a tailplane change, not a huge job, but expensive.
If the fabric has not been replaced on the flying controls, it will need doing, as the Chinese used cotton and it rots.
The normal and emergency air reservoirs corrode internally, and either need to be removed or boroscoped for an internal condition check, and require a hydrostat test every 5 years, no pitting corrosion is allowed inside the bottles
The water separator on the R/H side of the engine firewall corrodes internally, and needs to be disassembled for inspection, G-CGHB's was in a shocking state. There have been cases of these exploding, and the debris piercing the oil tank.
G-CGHB, had damage on the maingear uplock brackets, the mount holes being elongated and cracked, failure of this bracket will lead to the undercarriage, being stuck in the bay on retraction, worth a look.
The Chinese electrical wiring is very poor quality, we replaced it all on G-CGHB.
The aircraft are otherwise well built, hands and feet above the yaks.
Having just spent three years rebuilding one of these aircraft, (G-CGHB) i find myself well placed as to comment on what to look for on a pre-buy inspection.
These aircraft suffer with cracking on the tailplane spars, The cracks are located on the carry through section of the spar, above the tailcone. The UK CAA introduced an MPD for this subject which can be found on the CAA website.
There is a repair scheme for this cracking, but in the worst case scenario you will be looking at a tailplane change, not a huge job, but expensive.
If the fabric has not been replaced on the flying controls, it will need doing, as the Chinese used cotton and it rots.
The normal and emergency air reservoirs corrode internally, and either need to be removed or boroscoped for an internal condition check, and require a hydrostat test every 5 years, no pitting corrosion is allowed inside the bottles
The water separator on the R/H side of the engine firewall corrodes internally, and needs to be disassembled for inspection, G-CGHB's was in a shocking state. There have been cases of these exploding, and the debris piercing the oil tank.
G-CGHB, had damage on the maingear uplock brackets, the mount holes being elongated and cracked, failure of this bracket will lead to the undercarriage, being stuck in the bay on retraction, worth a look.
The Chinese electrical wiring is very poor quality, we replaced it all on G-CGHB.
The aircraft are otherwise well built, hands and feet above the yaks.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Asia's Fine City
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zanthrus
These chaps are CJ6 operators with a wealth of experience on type and also have one for sale for a very reasonable price - saw it a couple of weeks ago.
Classic Wings Magazine
These chaps are CJ6 operators with a wealth of experience on type and also have one for sale for a very reasonable price - saw it a couple of weeks ago.
Classic Wings Magazine
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: China
Age: 41
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Export the aircraft parts CJ-6, K-8,Y-8 and F-7
I can offer some aircraft parts, like CJ-6, K-8,Y-8 and F-7,[email protected]
And the first aircraft you see in the display is an American helicopter; has no-one told him?
So the North Koreans use AN2s and CJ6s as front line aircraft.
So the North Koreans use AN2s and CJ6s as front line aircraft.
