Just fits nicely from a comment from my FB-site:
in case Russia cuts off or becomes unable to supply D-30s for China's H-6Ks
This part doesn't make sense at all. The Chinese are still willing to use AL-31F's for their J-10 series, which is arguably more important than the H-6K. Conversely, if China did create a WS-18 copy, that would worsen Sino-Russian defense ties just like the J-11B
in case the WS-20 project becomes delayed
The Y-20's chief designer already said this March that the WS-20 was going to be incorporated in 2018.
practice project for their engineering team who had never designed a high-bypass turbofan before
I'm sorry but you don't "practice" by copying another country's turbofan. If you go look at the WS-10, which is China's first high thrust turbofan, did they copy the AL-31 or F-100??? The conditions were much worse back then and they still did not rip off another country's turbofan because it was too difficult ... why should the high bypass engine be any different?
China would prefer if a foreign country cannot establish a stranglehold on the manufacture of these strategic assets
Once again, current J-10C's are still equipped with Russian Al-31F engines. If they were that worried about the stranglehold, surely they would replace their single engine front line fighter by now??? The fact is China has been more than willing to have foreign systems substitute until domestic systems as ready.
The WS-18 mass production theory simply does not make sense. Directly copying engines is just as difficult as designing a completely new one; why would China have a WS-18 program when they could just divert more resources to the WS-20? Also, the WS-18/D-30KP2 is technology from the 1970s, and severely underpowered. Thus, China's Y-20 transport capacity is knocked down from 66 tonnes to around 50ish. Why would China be willing to mass produce Y-20's knowing that they have severe performance limitations? There is simply no way China will mass produce the Y-20 given the current engines ... whether Russian or a Chinese WS-18 ripoff. Provide me an example of when China has been successfully able to completely copy a Russian high performance turbofan and mass produce it ... I have yet to see a certain case. We have yet to see this magical WS-18 be flight tested ...
Logical or not, the PLAAF MUST have a reason, that deal is true ... denying it is illogical.
By the way, my source is not unreliable - in the same way the link I already posted three times is not unreliable - these rumours that the current Y-20 and H-6K are already using the WS-18 are unreliable, in fact they are all based on that single image from 2014 showing the Il-76LL testbed with an alleged WS-18 during maiden flight. From then on, NOTHING.
Deino
It's definite that the Y-20's final engine is WS-20, not WS-18. Even if the WS-18 is mounted on the Y-20, it's only an interim option. I think there are three reasons for the existence of WS-18; in case Russia cuts off or becomes unable to supply D-30s for China's H-6Ks, in case the WS-20 project becomes delayed, and as a practice project for their engineering team who had never designed a high-bypass turbofan before. Elaborating on point 1; China's long-range aerial strike force is composed completely of H-6Ks until at least the late-2020s/early-2030s when the H-X enters service, China would prefer if a foreign country cannot establish a stranglehold on the manufacture of these strategic assets. As for point 2, it relates somewhat to point 1 in that China cannot entirely trust Russia to supply D-30s for Y-20s if the WS-20 becomes delayed. Russia would very much prefer if the Y-20 project failed and China continue to purchase Il-76s or even Il-476s. Point 3 may prove very useful to China in the long term as their efforts on the WS-20 and WS-18 will build the foundation for their future high-bypass turbofan projects.
If this is such, then why do you support his WS-18 theory then? Doesn't this comment contradict everything we've been hearing?
