China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft

AeroEngineer

Junior Member
With all my respect, China just came to the same level or yet to catch what USSR had back in 1990 in many areas - even while it had a solid gap when we had murky 90s here. All professionals from Chinese aerospace industry I've met in my life are much more humble while talking of accomplishments and borrowing tech from abroad, as they don't write editorials in People's Daily.


True, but I still hope that Russians fanboys should stop the attacks.
 

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Y-20 means in future China can transport a fully equipped main battle tank

It also means they can drop mechanised armoured units and can establish a true air expeditionary unit with the lift capacity similar to the 101st airborne, a long way to go but slowly does it
 

flateric

Junior Member
Y-20 means in future China can transport a fully equipped main battle tank
Everyone thinks so judging from officially disclosed numbers, and cargo floor and cargo bay width seems to prove that, at least 99 and 99A2 fits.
But taking into account potential conflicts envisioned by PLA commanders, isn't it much easier to transport 'em just by sea or, save us God from this variant, by land?
 

MwRYum

Major
Transporting heavy armor will be a requirement, but mostly serves merely a benchmark of its lifting capacity. As we can see with the US example, air lifters usually deploys air-dropped cargo containers, large number of airborne troops, HALO in SEALs with their Zodiac boats; or delivery of helicopters, troops and armored cars to air fields.

Whereas heavy armor of the main elements are delivered by land or sea routes. For most, PLA will have its heavy vehicular assets making long-range delivery by trains.
 

i.e.

Senior Member
Everyone thinks so judging from officially disclosed numbers, and cargo floor and cargo bay width seems to prove that, at least 99 and 99A2 fits.
But taking into account potential conflicts envisioned by PLA commanders, isn't it much easier to transport 'em just by sea or, save us God from this variant, by land?

yeah but full service life of this aircraft is something like 30 years who knows what's the mission will be in 30 years.

also remember on china's western periphery the land arteries (rail, roads) are very thin and almost all has choke points that can be disabled.
But, the troops stationed in Xinjiang and Tibet are never meant to defeat an invasion by itself. they are meant to react quickly and hold on to strategic arteries, while the reinforcements gets pumped into these areas via these artiers for counter attack.

let's envision if a crisis erupts in xinjiang, heavy tanks or even just light infantry from an foreign entity rolling in,... and the land artieries are temporary out of action by surprise attacks, then an air lift campaign can quickly lift heavy armour, mech inf and air assault groups from staging basis in gansu, innermongolia, sichuan shanxi etc into forward air fields. independent or main artieries. that's a capability that is very nice to have.
 

i.e.

Senior Member
Transporting heavy armor will be a requirement, but mostly serves merely a benchmark of its lifting capacity. As we can see with the US example, air lifters usually deploys air-dropped cargo containers, large number of airborne troops, HALO in SEALs with their Zodiac boats; or delivery of helicopters, troops and armored cars to air fields.

Whereas heavy armor of the main elements are delivered by land or sea routes. For most, PLA will have its heavy vehicular assets making long-range delivery by trains.

One main requirement for C-5 was to lift heavy MBTs to europe in event of WW3, that soviet navy succeeded in break through the GIUK gap and disrupts transatlantic shipping while same time Soviet Armours rolled through faulda gap, shred GB, US, germany and french armies, and take the main ports in low countres and western europe. devoid Allies of means to call inthe reinforcements from continental US.
 

AeroEngineer

Junior Member
Everyone thinks so judging from officially disclosed numbers, and cargo floor and cargo bay width seems to prove that, at least 99 and 99A2 fits.
But taking into account potential conflicts envisioned by PLA commanders, isn't it much easier to transport 'em just by sea or, save us God from this variant, by land?


To correct you, Type 99A2 does NOT exit. There are only Type 99 and Type 99A.

Around 50 Type 99 are build and used for testing only from 1999- 2005. Then the finial production variant Type99A had many improvements such as amor, better sensors, engines, and munitions started mass prodution and now around 600 were build.

Type99A2 does not exit.

Just like 054 to 054A FFG, J-10 to J-10A fighters, etc,etc.
 
Top