Y-20 heavy transport aircraft News & Discussions

[Ultima Thule]

Let me ask you one simple question. Can the current Y-20 with WS-18 or D30kp2 engine haul a 54 tons Type99A2 MBT? If you replaced with WS-20. Can the Y-20 haul 2 MBT? The additional 10tons advantage is useless at the expense of more logistic problem, more cost.

Even the current Y-20 with WS-18 payload is more than Europe A400M. I don’t see how inferior or as bad as u claim. Unless you tell me Y-20 decide to haul NATO leopard 2 or Merkava MBT. But do you think that is a possible?
Y-20 is designed to fulfill PLA needs and is not to tailor for NATO weaponery.

but Range is unsatisfactory with WS-18 due high fuel consumption (low by pass ratio ) @Beast

 

[Beast]

but Range is unsatisfactory with WS-18 due high fuel consumption (low by pass ratio ) @Beast

Do u know what is the current range of Y-20?

 

[帅的一匹]

Hi, I think you still don’t understand the basic of simplify logistic and Maintain low cost. Keep on ranting the good performance while ignoring the cost and logistic of maintaining 2 types engine.

Sure USAF F-22 raptor is world beater and you shall ask pentagon why they keep F-22 number at 187? You really think US can print money at will?
Same applied to PLAAF.

WS20 is very important for China, both militaryor civilian purpose.

Stop抬杠

 

[Ultima Thule]

Do u know what is the current range of Y-20?

yes, 4500 KM with 60 tons, (full load) 7800 with 40 tons and with paratroopers 10,000 km but if to make an AWACS and Tanker based on Y-20 you need to better engine of better fuel efficiency to give more time on station
(air) and range @Beast sir

 

[帅的一匹]

As I said, if Y20 gonna be modified to a tanker, WS18 is not fuel efficient.

yes, 4500 KM with 60 tons, (full load) 7800 with 40 tons and with paratroopers 10,000 km but if to make an AWACS and Tanker based on Y-20 you need to better engine of better fuel efficiency to give more time on station
(air) and range @Beast sir

Bingo

 

[Beast]

I really don't see your point here. The extra ten tonnes could be used for extra supplies ... not just a heavy MBT. But more importantly, I cannot understand your refusal to believe that a low bypass, 40 year old WS-18 design is sufficient for a transport aircraft. I'm sure you understand that the WS-20 is a high bypass engine tailored to transport planes, while the WS-18 is more suitable for H-6 variants. If logistics and costs were really an issue, why would AVIC go through the pain of developing the WS-20? Why would are they starting to incorporate WS-10X into the J-20 or testing the TVC on the J-10? According to your reasoning, all this amounts to expensive logistical problems.

I am not discounting the possibility of a larger Y-20 variant. I just don't believe it is necessary currently and am doubtful it will show up in the short to mid term. For now, the PLAAF's goal is to get as many Y-20s inducted as possible and incorporate the WS-20. And once again, the WS-18 does not fulfill the PLAAF's needs. Having a mediocre low-bypass engine is definitely not ideal or even satisfactory for the Y-20 ... it is more of a necessity due to the lack of a domestic substitute hitherto.

You need to understand WS-20 is not targeted just for Y-20. Its is more important for militaries version of C919 since LEAP engine from US are not allowed to be install onboard C919 if converted to AWACS or tanker. SFA-J the targeted LEAP engine replacement has just started full assemble and ready for testing. It will take another few years before commission for used. WS-20 is near commission and will be ideal for militarized of C919.

Y-20 is a huge military plane. It has huge capacity for fuel. It need not to compete with courier for every weight ratio vs cost. I doubt the hassle of installing WS-20 can outweigh the maintenance and logistic. WS-18 is not same spec as D30kp2. It has improvement over it.

 

[帅的一匹]

You need to understand WS-20 is not targeted just for Y-20. Its is more important for militaries version of C919 since LEAP engine from US are not allowed to be install onboard C919 if converted to AWACS or tanker. SFA-J the targeted LEAP engine replacement has just started full assemble and ready for testing. It will take another few years before commission for used. WS-20 is near commission and will be ideal for militarized of C919.

Y-20 is a huge military plane. It has huge capacity for fuel. It need not to compete with courier for every weight ratio vs cost. I doubt the hassle of installing WS-20 can outweigh the maintenance and logistic. WS-18 is not same spec as D30kp2. It has improvement over it.

Being a tanker, WS20 is the best option.

 

[Beast]

yes, 4500 KM with 60 tons, (full load) 7800 with 40 tons and with paratroopers 10,000 km but if to make an AWACS and Tanker based on Y-20 you need to better engine of better fuel efficiency to give more time on station
(air) and range @Beast sir

I doubt Y-20 will be convert to AWACS, with KJ-500 service. Plus C919 is more suitable for AWACS. If Y-20 belly is converted just to hold fuel. It will have tremendous range. High by pass ratio will not be so critical. Do remember low by pass ratio turbofan is still much better than turbojet.

 

[Figaro]

You need to understand WS-20 is not targeted just for Y-20. Its is more important for militaries version of C919 since LEAP engine from US are not allowed to be install onboard C919 if converted to AWACS or tanker. SFA-J the targeted LEAP engine replacement has just started full assemble and ready for testing. It will take another few years before commission for used. WS-20 is near commission and will be ideal for militarized of C919.

Y-20 is a huge military plane. It has huge capacity for fuel. It need not to compete with courier for every weight ratio vs cost. I doubt the hassle of installing WS-20 can outweigh the maintenance and logistic. WS-18 is not same spec as D30kp2. It has improvement over it.

Actually it is targeted at the Y-20. The engine you are talking about for the C-919 is the CJ-1000 turbofan, not the WS-20. I don't know why you keep on insisting that the WS-18 is suitable for the Y-20 ... I will reiterate the facts : WS-18 is a low bypass engine based off a 40 year old design (not sure how much you can modernize) vs the WS-20 which is a high bypass engine based off a modern WS-10 core. Sure the WS-20 is not exclusively for the Y-20 but it's primary target for sure is the latter. If you want an analogy, just think about the H-6K. Why is XAC developing a entirely new class of stealth bombers if the H-6Ks were really satisfactory? Sure the H-6K is leaps and bounds above its predecessor variants but ultimately it is still based on an almost 70 year old design. Same with the WS-20. Just because the WS-18 is more advanced than its Russian counterpart does not mean that it is somehow suitable. But it seems this argument is going in circles ...

WS20 is very important for China, both militaryor civilian purpose.

Stop抬杠

Specific fuel consumption, inlet temperature, thrust (TWR) and high bypass ratios are all key advantages the WS-20 possesses over the WS-18. It doesn't matter how advanced of a D-30KP2 derivative one can make ... it is still going to be inferior (for transport planes) to an entirely new generation of turbofans such as the WS-20.

 

[Ultima Thule]

I doubt Y-20 will be convert to AWACS, with KJ-500 service. Plus C919 is more suitable for AWACS. If Y-20 belly is converted just to hold fuel. It will have tremendous range. High by pass ratio will not be so critical. Do remember low by pass ratio turbofan is still much better than turbojet.

Ok but tanker need a range @Beast sir and high by pass ratio engines has much better range than low by pass one @Beast sir, there are rumors that Y-20 based AWACS is in the future plan of PLAAF @Beast sir

 

[帅的一匹]

Ok but tanker need a range @Beast sir and high by pass ratio engines has much better range than low by pass one @Beast sir, there are rumors that Y-20 based AWACS is in the future plan of PLAAF @Beast sir

And the Y20 tanker is under development

 

[Ultima Thule]

And the Y20 tanker is under development

Are you asking @wanglaokan sir

 

[Beast]

Ok but tanker need a range @Beast sir and high by pass ratio engines has much better range than low by pass one @Beast sir, there are rumors that Y-20 based AWACS is in the future plan of PLAAF @Beast sir

Sorry, the rumour I heard is C919 will be future AWACS, not Y-20 based AWACS. But yes, Y-20 tanker are underway.

Actually it is targeted at the Y-20. The engine you are talking about for the C-919 is the CJ-1000 turbofan, not the WS-20. I don't know why you keep on insisting that the WS-18 is suitable for the Y-20 ... I will reiterate the facts : WS-18 is a low bypass engine based off a 40 year old design (not sure how much you can modernize) vs the WS-20 which is a high bypass engine based off a modern WS-10 core. Sure the WS-20 is not exclusively for the Y-20 but it's primary target for sure is the latter. If you want an analogy, just think about the H-6K. Why is XAC developing a entirely new class of stealth bombers if the H-6Ks were really satisfactory? Sure the H-6K is leaps and bounds above its predecessor variants but ultimately it is still based on an almost 70 year old design. Same with the WS-20. Just because the WS-18 is more advanced than its Russian counterpart does not mean that it is somehow suitable. But it seems this argument is going in circles ...

Specific fuel consumption, inlet temperature, thrust (TWR) and high bypass ratios are all key advantages the WS-20 possesses over the WS-18. It doesn't matter how advanced of a D-30KP2 derivative one can make ... it is still going to be inferior (for transport planes) to an entirely new generation of turbofans such as the WS-20.

I don’t doubt the advantage of WS-20 over WS-18 but at what cost vs performance and improvement? There’s always a requirement but if you hit the requirement and at low cost. I don’t see the need to go higher if at the expense of much higher operating cost and hassle.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Sorry, the rumour I heard is C919 will be future AWACS, not Y-20 based AWACS. But yes, Y-20 tanker are underway.

Huitong blogs said that @Beast sir
PLAAF Y-20A was demonstrating at the 2016 Zhuhai Airshow, wearing a dark blue paint scheme. This advanced 4-engine large transport has been under development since early 2000s at 603 Institute, XAC, CAC and SAC which appears similar to American C-17 and based upon some IL-76MD technology (see below). The development was accelerated after the large earthquake in 2008 in Sichuan Province. Assistance was sought from Antonov Design Bureau in 2008. Some specifications: range >7,800m, max speed 700km/h, service ceiling 13,000m, max payload 55t, max TO weight ~200t, depending on the exact type of engine powering the aircraft. Fitted with high-lifting devices along the wing leading and trailing edges plus six pairs of main landing wheels, Y-20A is capable of taking off from relatively short runways, making many airfields behind the battlefield accessible. Like C-17, it may also feature supercritical wings which give the aircraft a better fuel economy thus further extends its range. However so far no IFR probe was found onboard the aircraft. Other features include a four-crew glass cockpit with two HUDs and five large MFDs. A small FLIR (Enhanced Vision System/EVS) is installed below the forward windshield to assist taking off and landing under poor weather conditions. A dorsal SATCOM antenna is also seen behind the wings. The aircraft also features an FBW system. Overall Y-20A appears fatter and shorter than Il-76MD, bearing some resemblance to Japanese C-2 and Ukrainian An-70 transport. This suggests that its cargo bay dimension is a wider and taller, making it more versatile by being able to to carry a variety of oversize load, including ZBD-03 AFVs (at least 3) and one ZTZ99 MBT. In addition a stretched variant is thought to be under development with a larger cargo space. The prototypes and the initial batch are powered by Russian D-30KP-2/WS-18 turbofan, later by the modified WS-10 (WS-20 Huanghe?) high-bypass turbofan (as Y-20B?). A static test airframe was seen in December 2016 featuring modified engine pylons. Y-20A is also expected to be converted into a tanker (Y-20U?) replacing the obsolete H-6U, which might feature a flying boom system for refueling J-20. It will also serve as the platform of the next generation AWACS (KJ-3000?) replacing KJ-2000. It was also rumored that the aircraft might serve as the testbed for the Chinese airborne laser weapon prototype similar to American YAL-1. The head section of a full-scale metal mock-up of Y-20A was constructed by 2008. On August 20, 2009 SAC started to build the rear fuselage of the first prototype. It was reported in April 2010 that the full-scale mock-up was completed in early 2010. In January 2012 it was rumored that the airframe of the first prototype has been constructed, to be fitted with the avionics and engines. Three prototypes (001 - 003) were constructed by 2013, with the 002 prototype being the static test airframe. The first low speed taxiing of prototype 20001 took place on December 21, 2012 at the CFTE airfield in Yanliang. The first flight took place on January 26, 2013. The 001 prototype (S/N 781) later wears a dark blue color scheme after being transferred to CFTE. The third prototype (S/N 783) made its maiden flight on December 16, 2013 and has been undergoing various tests at different locations. Additional prototypes were built and flew in 2015 including 785 and 788. The last prototype (789) flew for the first time on February 6, 2016. It was reported in September 2015that a pulse assembly line has been established at XAC and was ready for production. The R&D of Y-20A was reportedly completed by the end of 2015. The first two Y-20A (S/N 11051 & 11052)were handed over to PLAAF at XAC on June 15, 2016. They were formally inducted to PLAAF on July 6, 2016. They were expected to be followed by 2 more (11053 & 11054) by the end of 2016. Currently more Y-20As are being constructed at XAC. The latest image (January 2017) indicated at least 6 Y-20As (up to 11056) are in service with PLAAF.

@Beast sir

 

[Deino]

5 Y-20As at Xi'an-Yanliang - 20180418 ... with what appears to be low-visibility markings??