What's new

Y-20 heavy transport aircraft News & Discussions

The developmental and evaluation phases are mutually exclusive (note: the evaluation phase is neither the test flight phase nor IOC). Test-flight involves the gradual evolution and improvement of the design/subsystems, usually at a civilian airfield, and is the phase in which actual design work is being carried out.

Evaluation is usually done after the aircraft configuration has settled (usually at the behest of the potential customer), and during which the final form of the aircraft is operated as if it were in active service; this is done to iron out any last-minute problems with either the inherent design (forcing CAC to make changes) or an individual airframe. This also allows the customer to assess the aircraft's collective capabilities during operational circumstances (which could not always be faithfully replicated during non-military testing).

It is important to note that, during evaluation, the aircraft is not actually in service, but merely subjected to the circumstances it will face as if it were operational. A successful evaluation paves the way for subsequent orders and induction of the said aircraft.

All aerospace products (including every individual airframe built by Boeing/Airbus/Embraer/etc.) goes through an evaluation phase, irregardless of when each aircraft type was "developed".

What happen if evaluation is not successful? Modification needs to be done? Remember Chief designer has left the post and Y-20 design is completed and is approved by top chain.

Then just let Y-20 left there and rot? Y-20 with or w/o the evaluation will enter service of PLAAF. Just wait and see Y-20 in service operation serial number this year.
 
.
What happen if evaluation is not successful? Modification needs to be done? Remember Chief designer has left the post and Y-20 design is completed and is approved by top chain.

I think You over-dramatize the issue: When all flight test is completed no real major hiccups are to be expected; it simply means light-testing, airworthiness and so on is completed. As such no major redesign or modifications will be needed.

However it also means that the operational procedures are not finalised, the flight manuals for the crews are not completed and all that stuff to handle such a new bird for the maintenance crews at the operational bases are fixed. And that all will be doe at the OPEVAL ... as such before that s not finalised, the Y-20 will not be readied for true operational service ... and even more not on an international exercise.

Then just let Y-20 left there and rot? Y-20 with or w/o the evaluation will enter service of PLAAF. Just wait and see Y-20 in service operation serial number this year.

You are funny ! You claim the PLAAF let all the serial J-10Bs with AL-31FN "rot" in order to wait for the WS-10B and we speak of now more than 70 aircraft Your logic !?

NO: they are operational in the same way the PAAF won't let these pre-serial or early serial Y-20s rot if the manuals are not fixed, it will further test them and probably use them with their limitations until everything is finished. Just look at the A.400M ..


Deino
 
Last edited:
.
b51075265041b53.jpg
 
. . . . . . . .
Actually, we have only 4 confirmed aircraft, since '20001' became 781, and then we have 783, 785 and now 788.

Deino

I think you are right. 785 and 788 appear in the matter of couple of months, Y-20 may be close to series production?
 
. . .
The problem with these serials is that they are simply no Xi'an c/n's. The first serials '20001' was such a number but right after this first prototype was assigned to the CFTE it gained a CFTE-serial similar to the many other's we know: the Tu-204C testbed for the J-20 with serial 769, the famous Y-8-radar testbed 079, the KJ-500 '737', the Y-8GX-6 '731' and '732' even the new Z-20 has the serial '632'.

Usually the new prototypes within the same type of aircraft receive the same number so no. 01 Y-20 = 781, no. 03 Y-20 = 783 and most likely no. 02 Y-20 would have been = 782 if it was not the static test frame.

It could however also be that 786 & 787 are very different types.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom