What's new

Y-20 heavy transport aircraft News & Discussions

can we put civilian engines instead?

yes, but you'll hear a lot of bitching from uncle. they won't stop continue selling to china, because china is the second or third largest aviation market. it's just anonying..
those engines equiped on vintatge 747 and airbus palnes are much more advanced than the russian PS-90A engine that they plan to use on their next gen military transport plane
 
.
Engine development has not kept pace with the incredible developments within the aviation industry -- Got it - but be fair, it's the nature of the technologies involved that their development has not been as fast as that in avionics or materials -- but lets not let that obscure or mar this achievement -- better engines(more power, greater efficiency) are in the works, they are not the measure of this or other achievements - need better engines, OK, got it - lets move on.
 
.
Y-X cockpit simulator

5fS6u1h.jpg
 
. .
For now, in the area of heavy airlift, China cannot help but play catch up. The technology has been matured by others, notably the US and Soviets/Russia. All that fanciful 'stealth' versions are speculative, even for US as we have other priorities.

For strategic air transport, China does not have anything that can move -- within the crucial 48/72 hrs window -- the US 82nd Airborne equivalent to anywhere on mainland China, and by that I mean not only troops but all of their support including armor. Not only does the PLA do not have a capable strategic heavy lifter, the PLAAF does not have sufficient quantity of whatever is capable anyway. About 30 IL-76MDs? While the US have over 200 C17s, not counting the C-141 and the C-5, the last is freed and used for outsized cargo. Supposedly, the PLA's 99A2 main battle tank cannot be air transported with the current airlift capability. Not only that, because the C-17 came from matured platforms like the -130, -141, and the -5, all with proven global record, from tactical small units to their battlefields to strategic division level transport, the C-17 was given tacit trust by potential customers even before the first delivery.

The Y-20 is about two years behind schedule, which is not to sneer at because the US have our own manufacturing issues, but when coupled with an engine that for now lends the perception that said engine is crippling the Y-20's optimistic capabilities, it will be several more years, possibly a decade, before the Y-20 is truly capable for mass production and the PLA can be rightfully admitted to an exclusive club of heavy strategic airlift capable militaries.

The Y-20 is not designed as a C-17 to begin with. Its size is only about 80% of that of the C-17. With China's domestic WS-20 high-bypass turbofan engine, the air lifter is able to carry 66 tons and fly 4400 km without in-flight refueling. The maximum take-of weight is 220+ tons. In comparison, C-17 can carry a maximum of 77.5 tons with a MTOW of 265 tons. With current engines, the Y-20 is estimated to carry 50-55 tons.

The Y-20 is not a C-17 clone, because their structures are fundamentally different: Y-20 has a wings-above-fuselage design, while C-17 has a wings-through-body design.

The Y-20 is not a IL-76 clone either: the Y-20 has supercritical airfoils, which reduce drag and save fuel. It also has a wider body to accommodate larger volume of cargo. The IL-76 and IL-476 have neither.
 
. .
The Y-20 is not designed as a C-17 to begin with. Its size is only about 80% of that of the C-17. With China's domestic WS-20 high-bypass turbofan engine, the air lifter is able to carry 66 tons and fly 4400 km without in-flight refueling. The maximum take-of weight is 220+ tons. In comparison, C-17 can carry a maximum of 77.5 tons with a MTOW of 265 tons. With current engines, the Y-20 is estimated to carry 50-55 tons.

The Y-20 is not a C-17 clone, because their structures are fundamentally different: Y-20 has a wings-above-fuselage design, while C-17 has a wings-through-body design.

The Y-20 is not a IL-76 clone either: the Y-20 has supercritical airfoils, which reduce drag and save fuel. It also has a wider body to accommodate larger volume of cargo. The IL-76 and IL-476 have neither.
What I said was not a comparison but about the need for a heavy airlifter in general. So when there is an undisputed leader in heavy airlift -- US -- there is no choice but to bring in specific examples.
 
.
find it at military photo a thread about Iranian stealth fighter

931aa66fc9aea34bf2857076c425229454a7ee9f.jpg

I guess it's even easier to be jealous, which was probably what drove the author to create this compilation.
 
.
half of those planes in the pic are licensed manufacturing. the rests easily replaced..

A400,C2,KC390,MTA.........c17
KFX..............f35
hermes, anca............reaper/predator
too many uav helis.....
kfx,jap atdx, amca, t-50.............f-22
eads talarion................rq4
petit duc, neurons, taranis........x45
gripen, rfale,ef-2000 ..........lavi
 
. . .
To those who say the Chinese have copied - (and hell they do a damn good job on it), can we also go back in history and look at the number of fighter a/c of the 1st / 2nd WW that all looked similar ? We had US/Brit/Germ/Jap fighters that had a similar silhouette - if not copied.
 
.
I respect the Chinese Aviation Industry. They made major gains over the years.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom