China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft

manqiangrexue said:

Though I think C919 with WS-20 will be better for both tanker and AWAC. The Y-20 air frame specializes in heavy lift over efficiency, the latter of which is preferable for both aforementioned roles.

Click to expand...

As if heavy lifting doesn't require efficiency. The reason civilian platforms are used in the West is because there are a lot of them already. Economy of scale means lower cost per platform and spare parts. Such situation doesn't apply to C919.

Engineer said:

As if heavy lifting doesn't require efficiency. The reason civilian platforms are used in the West is because there are a lot of them already. Economy of scale means lower cost per platform and spare parts. Such situation doesn't apply to C919.

Click to expand...

Well, that's going to be true for C919 as well, no? I don't imagine they will be making more Y-20 than C919 air frames. I thought that passenger jets offered better range, fuel efficiency, and additional safety features over heavy lift aircraft, which are basically optimized to lift and be shaped in a way that can dump a tank out the rear end.

Anyway, having the Y-20 as an option sure beats being at the mercy of Ilyushin sales!

manqiangrexue said:

Well, that's going to be true for C919 as well, no? I don't imagine they will be making more Y-20 than C919 air frames.

Click to expand...

No. One shouldn't count chickens before the eggs hatched, and by the time C919 has enough quantity so will Y-20.

Engineer said:

No. One shouldn't count chickens before the eggs hatched, and by the time C919 has enough quantity so will Y-20.

Click to expand...

What does that mean? That you think C919, a medium commercial airliner, won't sell even enough to be made in numbers higher than Y-20, a military lift jet? It's already got over 500 orders and hasn't even flown yet; I don't know if China wants to order 500 Y-20 air frames. Plus, I may be wrong, but I feel that C919 is inherently a cheaper aircraft to make than Y-20 since it's smaller and uses only 2 engines as opposed to 4 (we're talking all WS-20 here). It doesn't have the lifting power of Y-20, but do tankers and AWACs need that type of lifting power? Maybe not because China is miniaturizing AWACs technology, putting the power of the KJ-2000 in a KJ-500. But maybe the extra lift is useful; perhaps they can put a super radar into use that only the Y-20 can carry to make the world's finest AWAC...

manqiangrexue said:

What does that mean? That you think C919, a medium commercial airliner, won't sell even enough to be made in numbers higher than Y-20, a military lift jet? It's already got over 500 orders and hasn't even flown yet; I don't know if China wants to order 500 Y-20 air frames. Plus, I may be wrong, but I feel that C919 is inherently a cheaper aircraft to make than Y-20 since it's smaller and uses only 2 engines as opposed to 4 (we're talking all WS-20 here). It doesn't have the lifting power of Y-20, but do tankers and AWACs need that type of lifting power? Maybe not because China is miniaturizing AWACs technology, putting the power of the KJ-2000 in a KJ-500. But maybe the extra lift is useful; perhaps they can put a super radar into use that only the Y-20 can carry to make the world's finest AWAC...

Click to expand...

It will take a long time to replace all those foreign systems in c919, especially the engine, which require lots of flight testing

manqiangrexue said:

Though I think C919 with WS-20 will be better for both tanker and AWAC. The Y-20 air frame specializes in heavy lift over efficiency, the latter of which is preferable for both aforementioned roles.

Click to expand...

It should be noted that the C919 is not in the same class as the Y-20. It is much closer to the Y-9.

C919 may be slightly better than the Y-9 in terms of comfort, fuel efficiency, range, and speed so it may take over some of the roles currently taken by the Y-8/9 such as AWACS, ELINT, ASW, ect. However this is a big "may" because the Y-9 can still do pretty much everything that the C919 can do and it will be cheaper to purchase and operate. The PLA probably won't find a need to upgrade to the C919 for most of these roles. After all, the performance of these special role aircraft are determined mostly by the on-board equipment, not by the platform.

On the other hand, for roles better suited by a larger platform, such as aerial refueling, both the C-919 and the Y-9 are not big enough to be an ideal option. The Y-20 is big enough, but still not ideal because like most military lifters it sacrificed cruising efficiency for wider cargo space. I believe as long as the PLA can buy enough Il-78 then they will not bother to develop a C919 or Y-20 based tanker. In the long run the C929 should become the ideal platform for aerial refueling.

manqiangrexue said:

Though I think C919 with WS-20 will be better for both tanker and AWAC. The Y-20 air frame specializes in heavy lift over efficiency, the latter of which is preferable for both aforementioned roles.

Click to expand...

C919 could make a great platform for AEW&C, as well as other roles such as MPA, ELINT/SIGINT, command, standoff ECM, etc, but probably won't make a very good tanker given its small size (as others may have already said).

Also, as an AEW&C, C919 will be more of a medium size AEW&C than a true large AEW&C that could be provided such as from a Il-76, 707 or 767, or A330, or indeed Y-20. Obviously optimally a true widebody aircraft would make the best aircraft for a large size AEW&C, as well as the best aircraft for tankers, but such an aircraft will not be available to the Chinese military for a while yet.

Come on ... a tanker in a B-737 or A.320-sized airliner ???!!! How many of them are operational ??

Maybe at best in the special EW-roles, as VIP-transports ... maybe even ASW but surely not as a tanker and that all only AFTER the C919 is certified, all western systems were replaced and serial production has a capacity large enough besides all civil orders. So forget that idea at least within the next 10 years.

Franklin said:

In the short to medium run the Y-20 will be using the WS-18 (D-30K) engines. It means that it won't lift the 66 tons of its design but over 40 tons. That is the reality of China's aerospace industry today. That its full of interim solutions when it comes to the engines. It may not be able to lift the latest Type 99 MBT's but it can still lift a Type 96 MBT that is just about 43 tons. And the Type 96 MBT is still the backbone of the PLAGF.

Click to expand...

Y-20 *might* not be able to lift Type 99 MBT, but personally I don't think China is going to stop at Y-20 and settle for just lifting the lighter Type 96 MBT. Y-20 is just the beginning. Don't forget both Uniteds States and Russia have much heavier transports that can lug much greater payloads than their workhorse C-17 and Il-76.


They are Lockheed C-5 Galaxy


and Antonov An-124 Ruslan


I am pretty sure the next two decades once China finish up with Y-20 they will start working on C-5/An-124 class strategic transport.

OT
That reminds me of an early bit of C-5 history. So much weight had been saved in the wing - at the time US didn't have a large press to make large wing spars - that after a short time the cargo was limited to 25 t., even less than the 40 t. current limit of Y-20, and much less than necessary to carry a single tank. Only when the wings had been remade was the cargo returned to some 80 t. That and the Rolls Royce RB211 trouble ended Lockheed's role in the manufacture of civilian aircraft.