Re: China's transport plane capacities
WS-13 getting Russian support? You think the Russians are that stupid to help China make a product that will eliminate that market. Who said copying D-30? Their own high bypass engine has been working on for a few years now, it's already conducting flight tests. And add to that, if you've read about the progress of WS-15 and improved WS-10A, you'd know that they are capable of developing engines much faster in the old days.
Russians offers help with WS-13 because that's the only way to get any order from PLAAF. PLAAF weren't high on FC-1 anyway, a Russian engine will kill it. That's why WS-13 was developed. For Klimov, helping with WS-13 is very logical, getting only a piece of the pie is better than having none at all.
As for China's own "high bypass turbofan", that's nothing but vapor ware. If they have it already, then the new Large aircraft project would not have included the need to develop China's own high bypass turbofan. WS-15 is pretty much in the same category as it's just RUMORED to be developed and has years to go before even turned on for the first time. WS-10A is low bypass engine designed for fighters and it's thrust is not enough when compared to D-30.
The Russians certainly don't control the Kazakhs. As for Russian cutting China off, that's a really interesting point, because Russians have accused China of copying them for years, yet they are still trying to sell more to China.
Russians don't control them. But most of the parts are produced in Russia, and the Russian government certainly controls those. Plus, the factory wanted to sell blueprints precisely because Russia had cut off their supplies of parts and support, so how are they going to help China getting parts when they can't do that themselves?
That's rubbish, I have a kanwa interview with Vegas who said they never assisted China will the IL-76 conversion for KJ-2000 platform. The original one that Israel fitted was using an A-50 airframe. And A-50 was already modified by the Russian from IL-76 for AWACs purpose. Vega stated they were extremely surprised by the amount of modification China put in.
That IL-76 Phalcan were constructed from a stock IL-76 airframe, using a plan modified from basic A-50 setup, but not modified from an existing A-50. It's hard to imagine China not had at least some liaison officers in Russia to observe the modification process and reviewing the plans. So China definitely had the technical information on how that modification took place. But just for the sake of argument say they DIDN'T get it. The Israelis deal were canceled in year 2000, and KJ-2000 was flying at around 2006 or 2007. That's 6 years from start of project, assuming they only started it AFTER the cancellation of Phalcon, to an actual example flying. That's 6 years to complete the modification project, using all those modern equipment you were talking about, and using experience gained through servicing them and operating them. Don't you think setting up a complete new production line would take just as long, if not longer than a modification project?
you are talking about materials that were developed back in the days, so the current technology level in China is greater than that. You are talking about old manufacturing process that China would be able to improve on. You are talking about parts that China can built themselves or buy from all the previous Soviet republics. Case in point, Russians haven't stopped sourcing parts for J-11B, have they?
Again, J-11B is a sanction modification as permitted in the original purchasing contract for Su-27. It's flying only some 15 years after the start of license production agreement, where the Russian provided all the technical document, production tooling and 100% of parts initially needed to produce and service Su-27, and provided assistance each step of the way until SAC mastered the skills needed to produce them. Surely that proves that China can copy IL-76 within 2 years after receiving blueprints and production documents?
I think not.
let's put it this way, I personally don't expect China to go for IL-76, because it's technology is pretty old. I think they are going for their own transport. Even that I think will be ready by 2015, which is faster than your time frame.
Yet again, you have no proof behind your conclusion, and it doesn't fit China's track record. Take ARJ-21 for example, the project started in 2002, and even with all the assistance from foreign companies on ALL the critical subsystems, (Antonov on the wing, GE on the engine, Rockwell (or was it Honeywell) on the avionics), using existing production tooling left from MD-90 project, the first flight of the prototype is only going to take place by March of this year. That's six years from start of project to first flight. Yet you believe that on a much more complex project (the new large transport), without foreign help from the West(since military project can't receive their help), it's going to take shorter time than the much simpler ARJ-21. Let's put it this way, it's NOT going to happen.
China would only go for something like IL-76 if they can get it done far faster than their own transport. Remember, military transport doesn't have to worry about passing FAA and even their airline project (which is planned to get that) is expected to be finished before 2020. So, my problem with what you said is that China is not capable of getting IL-76 copied in a speedy timeframe.
I think you just refuted your own statement here. China would go for IL-76 only if can be done far faster than their own. So 2 years as stated by someone above and which you apparently agree to is not fast enough? Remember, that's 5 years ahead of your own very optimistic prediction on getting a new aircraft. So 5 years plus the track record of a mature design isn't as attractive as a new design. That could only mean one thing: There isn't too much time difference between copying IL-76 and getting a new design.
