timepass
Brigadier
Oh Ya.. For Sure... you are 100% correct..My Dear...
China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft - esp. Y-20/YY-20
- Thread starter Totoro
- Start date
Oh Ya.. For Sure... you are 100% correct..My Dear...
Sorry again, but - could it be that You a bit overambitious to defend Yourself, Your opinion or anything that can be interpreted as a offence against the Chinese aviation industry ? – that was simply meant as a request for similar images in large & high-resolution ! Nothing more … and for anything else I don’t want to agrue any longer with You since I can’t bring You the proof You demand, ... in the other way You have Your opinion – that’s fine – and I have my understanding of the background and that’s also fine and time will tell.
Deino
I don't see why Y-20 has to have traits of An-70 to proof that Antonov consulted on the project. AVIC1 could've asked Antonov to provide some technical data or wind tunnel testing results that they don't previously have. Or AVIC1 could've asked Antonov to design something based on An-70 and they didn't like the result of it, so they continued down their IL-76/C-17 path. Or they could've just learnt their development process of Antonov and that helped with their own development process. Or since I don't know enough about large transport, I can't conclusively say that Y-20 has nothing that's inspired from any of Antonov planes.
There is nothing wrong with AVIC1 paying Antonov to help develop Y-20 and it doesn't need to look like An-70 to proof that Antonov provided help.
There is nothing wrong with AVIC1 paying Antonov to help develop Y-20 and it doesn't need to look like An-70 to proof that Antonov provided help.
Over big ambition? Lol.. My opinion is build up based on facts. While most of your speculating is based on steretyping of china not able to build a transport plane that big because its their first time. China has demonstrated it did not need to build F-117 stealth plane first before moving on to something like J-20. So why can't china build a Y-20 by herself with the first start?
Since you already can't bring any evidence. My stance is valid. Facts that Y-20 looks nothing of any Advise from antonov based on their main line product of An-70. It has to be a Chinese effort. Ilyushin ,airbus and Boeing consultant will be out of question. Since sither they are rival or embargo to help. The Advancement of Chinese technology is amazing but not unexpected. Y-9 gives China a very good head start for Y-20.
That is nonsense. If by your theory, you can say whatever you want without facts and it will still sound correct? Things are proven by fact not by personal opinion. Trait of similar component or structure on a advise customer product is a proof of advise accepted. If you are confident of your top of line product. You standby it and give advise from it. antonov advise might be sought , I accept it but not neccessary means its chosen or utilise by Chinese for Y-20 project. As proven by L-15 advance trainer case. Yakovelev standby their top of line product and they give advise based on it with their expertise. china buy the idea and incorporate into L-15. AVIC openly admit yakovelev involvement and there is nothing to hide. Y-20? nothing mention of antonov from official chinese source.
What I understand is Chinese always do things prudently but not neccessary conservative as demonstrated by J-20. They need Antonov advise as backup. But antonov advise maybe outdated or not in line with what Chinese need as demonstrated a totally different product from An-70 of Y-20. Chinese feel their design is superior or better than what antonov advise that is strap on 4 turbofan on An-70, as example. Therefore, y-20 which is a Chinese effort is born. antonov advise is irrelevant.
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
C'mon Lion.. you are so adamant about the Y-20 looking absolutely alien to the AN-70 and then based your assessement of Antonov's 'ZERO participation' on it. One can also say that while they are not exactly similar it's not like one looked like a duck the other other a chicken either.
For every 10 things that you say looks different one can also say there are 10 things which looks similar between the two platform. I don't think people are saying Antonov played a crucial design role or anything but why is it so impossible to believe that they may have at least some involvement however small their contribution may be?
If its such small , why mention it? Even without it, Y-20 will still be success by the Chinese Without any help exept the engine. Those advise are irrelevant. If by your theory of chicken and duck. A mig-19 looks no different from J-20?
From my illustration, you can see an-70 and Y-20 looks so vastly different. Totally different aerodynamic and structure, how can you believe an70 advise or any structure is worth install on Y-20?
I say it bluntly. Actually a lot wanted to interpret as Y-20 is a antonov effort. Chinese will never succeed Y-20 without its help. I will prove this stereotyping opinion wrong at all cost.
Last edited:
kwaigonegin
Colonel
In that case may I suggest you bring more than just 'but I don;t think they look similar' argument. If you have actual hard data or fact sheets to totally prove AN did NOT play any role I'm sure we'll be more than happy to hear it.
Schumacher
Senior Member
Hmm... I think it goes the other way around.
