It is customary to close the year with pictures, recaps, and predictions. Here are a few from Aviation Week. I haven't seen these posted. See if you agree with their numbers and projections.
View attachment 123255
View attachment 123257
As mentioned above, Y-20B being a potential MRTT is one of those things that they have declined to consider (or even aware of).
The graphs themselves are not great, frankly it would have been more useful to just have smaller individual graphs of aircraft types by airframe families/variants. Reading the graph as it is laid out, it's not exactly obvious at a glance as to how many actual "Y-20" airframes they project to be built per year.
The global export market prediction is as good as useless, and it seems they are still talking about the MC-X without having considered the fact that ROKAF intends to buy KC-390.
For these kind of graphs and projections they're generally not very useful for us, it's more about seeing how unreasonable their predictions are. In this case, "meh" is probably the best response.
The article and data tabulated seems to have neglected the actual possibility of the Y-20B being built to the specifications of an MRTT (multirole tanker transport), rather than separated pure airlifter and pure refueling tanker variants. If all of the Y-20Bs are indeed being built as MRTTs, any attempt at classifying the Y-20B into separate airlifter and refueler categories would be rather moot.
Of course, this is not to say that the pure airlifter variant of the Y-20B should be ruled out, especially if they are the only ones capable of refueling larger warplanes (bombers, airlifters and special mission aircrafts) of the PLAAF and PLAN.
I assume you mean "not to say that the pure refueller variant of the Y-20 should be ruled out" give what the rest of the sentence is.