H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
Good question. I don't see why not. Its speed may be slower because WS-20 has larger bypass ratio.

Both Y-20 and H-6 have been using D30-KP-2 engines. The WS-18 is intended as potential replacement of D30 for both aircraft. There is no reason why WS-20 can not be used on H-6. However, I think right now the Y-20 and YU-20 are prioritized for WS-20.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest reason for not doing so is because of the structural rework that will be needed.
WS-20 has different dimensions to D-30, specifically it is wider. The location of H-6's engines being at the wing root means they'd have to spend a bit of time and resources to re-engineer it and do another cycle of flight tests to verify everything.

Given we are probably at... what, over 130+ H-6K/J/N airframes combined now, I do not see them building many more H-6K/J/N airframes, perhaps a couple dozen or more.

I don't think it'll be worth developing a whole new H-6 airframe to accommodate WS-20, given that.
If they were looking to build another 100+ H-6 airframes, that might be a different matter.
 
W

weig2000

Captain
Bltizo said:
I think the biggest reason for not doing so is because of the structural rework that will be needed.
WS-20 has different dimensions to D-30, specifically it is wider. The location of H-6's engines being at the wing root means they'd have to spend a bit of time and resources to re-engineer it and do another cycle of flight tests to verify everything.

Given we are probably at... what, over 130+ H-6K/J/N airframes combined now, I do not see them building many more H-6K/J/N airframes, perhaps a couple dozen or more.

I don't think it'll be worth developing a whole new H-6 airframe to accommodate WS-20, given that.
If they were looking to build another 100+ H-6 airframes, that might be a different matter.
Click to expand...

Completely agreed.

I originally thought it was a more theoretical question, that is, if it's possible to do so. I just realized that he was asking whether it's worthwhile doing so. I modified my answer, but you're too quick in your response. LOL.
 
F

FangYuan

Junior Member
Registered Member
Jono said:
is it worthwhile to redesign H6 around WS20?
Click to expand...

H-6 redesign around WS-20 will bring new patents and technologies. Xian H-6 uses WS-20 will save fuel and stronger

However, the redesign of H-6 needs a lot of money. That's why that will never happen.
 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Jono said:
is it worthwhile to redesign H6 around WS20?
Click to expand...
weig2000 said:
Good question. H6 can be equipped with WS-20. Its speed may be slower because WS-20 has larger bypass ratio.

Both Y-20 and H-6 have been using D30-KP-2 engines. The WS-18 is intended as potential replacement of D30 for both aircraft. However, I think right now the Y-20 and YU-20 are prioritized for WS-20.
Click to expand...


No, you cannot fit those large engines in the slimmer D-30 engines-bay. As such technically it may be possible but only after a redesign ... IMO this won't happen
 
F

FangYuan

Junior Member
Registered Member
Jono said:
is it worthwhile to redesign H6 around WS20?
Click to expand...
1. It brings many new patents and technologies

2. Create many jobs and train many engineers, experts, designers

3. Its range and load more

4. It saves fuel

The biggest problem is to need a lot of money to redesign the H-6 (can be up to hundred million USD).

If PLAAF wants to improve the range, load and fuel efficiency of H-6, they will redesign the H-6 around WS-20. But that doesn't happen, it shows that PLAAF thinks "That is not worthwhile"
 
C

caohailiang

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
I think the biggest reason for not doing so is because of the structural rework that will be needed.
WS-20 has different dimensions to D-30, specifically it is wider. The location of H-6's engines being at the wing root means they'd have to spend a bit of time and resources to re-engineer it and do another cycle of flight tests to verify everything.

Given we are probably at... what, over 130+ H-6K/J/N airframes combined now, I do not see them building many more H-6K/J/N airframes, perhaps a couple dozen or more.

I don't think it'll be worth developing a whole new H-6 airframe to accommodate WS-20, given that.
If they were looking to build another 100+ H-6 airframes, that might be a different matter.
Click to expand...
do you think they will replace older version with K/N/J? i think they still have 5 regiments of older version, while having 7 k/n/j regiments.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
I do not think it makes sense to re-engine the H-6 with the WS-20. Like you guys said the engine diameter is larger so the engine won't fit in the existing airframe. Plus the H-20 is going to enter service soon. The H-20 is also going to be a subsonic bomber with much higher range. So I do not think it makes any sense to further flog this dead horse.
 
Last edited:
R

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
If the H6 is designed in such a way that the engine passes through the wing spar at the wing root, Which I suspect it is, using a substantially larger engine means completely redesigning the wing. The most basic structural production tooling would have to be thrown away and built a anew.It would might as well be a new aircraft.

And even if the spa nearly curves above the engine, it will still be structurally impossible to adapt a much larger engine without totally redesigning the wing
 
AF-1

AF-1

Junior Member
Registered Member
Recently there were articles and discussion here about reengining H-6s (and Y-20s) with WS-18 engine, which is size comparable with current Russian engines. Is that option still alive?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top