China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft - esp. Y-20/YY-20

M

Mekconyov

New Member
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
No. There won't be separate (turboprop-powered and turbofan-powered) variants of the Y-15. There will only be one turboprop-powered Y-15. And the Y-15 wIll not be in the same airlifter class as the A400M and C-2.
Click to expand...
Watch for the surprises in airlifters. China want to exceed from Japan's C-2 and they would do it. Y-15 would be larger thab C-2 ie A400M《C-2《Y-15. More over Y-20B elongated one would reach 100 ton where as Y-40 would be in 125-50 tons category.

Definitely Y-15 would be able to carry 45 tons and mostly between 30-45 tons in its final iterations. Reason for 2 WS-20 engines of Y-15 is engines are available, but WJ-10 are in development. Turboprop version would take more time to mature due to development of 8 blade propellers and WJ-10 turboprop engines.

PLAAF is not going to ignore C-2 competition. It is PLAAF VS JSDAF. It all depends upon engines and subsystem assemblies' progress,
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Mekconyov said:
Watch for the surprises in airlifters. China want to exceed from Japan's C-2 and they would do it. Y-15 would be larger thab C-2 ie A400M《C-2《Y-15. More over Y-20B elongated one would reach 100 ton where as Y-40 would be in 125-50 tons category. Definitely Y-15 would be able to carry 45 tons and mostly between 30-45 tons in its final iterations. Reason for 2 WS-20 engines of Y-15 is engines are available, but WJ-10 are in development. Turboprop version would take more time to mature due to development of 8 blade propellers and WJ-10 turboprop engines. PLAAF is not going to ignore C-2 competition. It is PLAAF VS JSDAF. It all depends upon engines and subsystem assemblies' progress,
Click to expand...

You really are coming here onto this forum and making a lot of big statements without anything to substantiate it.

Calm down a little.

We don't have the right to do freewheeling speculation like what you're writing, because PLA watching is about interpreting indicators and evidence to make predictions rather than openly imagining possibilities with minimal grounding.
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Mekconyov said:
Watch for the surprises in airlifters. China want to exceed from Japan's C-2 and they would do it. Y-15 would be larger thab C-2 ie A400M《C-2《Y-15. More over Y-20B elongated one would reach 100 ton where as Y-40 would be in 125-50 tons category.

Definitely Y-15 would be able to carry 45 tons and mostly between 30-45 tons in its final iterations. Reason for 2 WS-20 engines of Y-15 is engines are available, but WJ-10 are in development. Turboprop version would take more time to mature due to development of 8 blade propellers and WJ-10 turboprop engines.

PLAAF is not going to ignore C-2 competition. It is PLAAF VS JSDAF. It all depends upon engines and subsystem assemblies' progress,
Click to expand...

No. Just stop right there.

The wings on the Y-15 are straight, whereas the wings on both the A400M and C-2 are obviously rear-swept.

Straight wing aircrafts excel at low speed flying and maneuvering, which is especially useful for operations from short, austere, hot-and/or-high runways/strips. However, this means that the aircraft won't be flying as fast as non-straight wing aircrafts. This is in contrast with rear-swept wing aircrafts, which excel at higher speeds but have relatively poorer low-speed handling performances.

The PLAAF certainly has emphasized the focus of the Y-15's design on the need to operate from shorter, hot-and/or-high airstrips (namely, in the Xizang Plateau and the SCS), hence the straight wing design we see on the Y-15 today.

This is apart from the fact where turboprop engines have higher fuel efficiencies while operating at lower speeds at relatively lower altitudes, whereas turbofan engines fare worse in similar conditions. This is among the key reasons for turbofan-powered aircrafts to fly faster and higher than turboprop-powered aircrafts.

Also, an airlifter that can still take-off with 4x WJ-6C/G/J/X (or WJ-10) engines will not be comparable to the A400M and C-2, as both of them have different weight categories to begin with.

Sorry to rain in your parade, but the engineers at Shaanxi and Xi'an are very much focused on meeting the needs and demands of the PLAAF as their primary mission, not to engage in a rat race with the C-2 and A400M. Any export orders for the Y-15 would be an added benefit, and not the dominant driver of the Y-15's design choices.
 
Last edited:
sunnymaxi

sunnymaxi

Colonel
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
No.

There won't be separate, turboprop-powered and turbofan-powered variants of the Y-15. There will only be one turboprop-powered variant of the Y-15.

And the Y-15 will not be in the same airlifter class as the A400M and C-2 either.
Click to expand...
SOYO did a very interesting post..

AEP400/500 are based on a newly developed dual-rotor tri-shaft turboprop engine architecture. This architecture is designed to provide a 4500-8000kw-class turboshaft/turboprop engine for advanced heavy helicopters/advanced propeller aircraft, with advantages such as high upgrade potential and long service life of key components. The power rating of the AEP400/500 has been confirmed,

he also talked about C-10 new turboprop developed by certain company ??

the new "Big Fat" (referring to the new motorcycle model) will definitely be stronger than the 130J. How much it will close the gap with the A400M remains to be seen..

008tJu9Ogy1i8csaxnibxj314m0rsgyl.jpg
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
sunnymaxi said:
SOYO did a very interesting post..

AEP400/500 are based on a newly developed dual-rotor tri-shaft turboprop engine architecture. This architecture is designed to provide a 4500-8000kw-class turboshaft/turboprop engine for advanced heavy helicopters/advanced propeller aircraft, with advantages such as high upgrade potential and long service life of key components. The power rating of the AEP400/500 has been confirmed,

he also talked about C-10 new turboprop developed by certain company ??

the new "Big Fat" (referring to the new motorcycle model) will definitely be stronger than the 130J. How much it will close the gap with the A400M remains to be seen..

View attachment 166327
Click to expand...

By "10", SOYO is actually referring to the WJ-10.

And in his original post, SOYO is suggesting that the Y-15 might have flew with WJ-10 instead of the WJ-6C/G/J/X.
 
Last edited:
M

Mekconyov

New Member
Registered Member
ACuriousPLAFan said:
No. Just stop right there.

The wings on the Y-15 are straight, whereas the wings on both the A400M and C-2 are obviously rear-swept.

Straight wing aircrafts excel at low speed flying and maneuvering, which is especially useful for operations from short, austere, hot-and/or-high runways/strips. However, this means that the aircraft won't be flying as fast as non-straight wing aircrafts. This is in contrast with rear-swept wing aircrafts, which excel at higher speeds but have relatively poorer low-speed handling performances.

The PLAAF certainly has emphasized the focus of the Y-15's design on the need to operate from shorter, hot-and/or-high airstrips (namely, in the Xizang Plateau and the SCS), hence the straight wing design we see on the Y-15 today.

This is apart from the fact where turboprop engines have higher fuel efficiencies while operating at lower speeds at relatively lower altitudes, whereas turbofan engines fare worse in similar conditions. This is among the key reasons for turbofan-powered aircrafts to fly faster and higher than turboprop-powered aircrafts.

Also, an airlifter that can still take-off with 4x WJ-6C/G/J/X (or WJ-10) engines will not be comparable to the A400M and C-2, as both of them have different weight categories to begin with.

Sorry to break your bubble, but the engineers at Shaanxi and Xi'an are very much focused on fulfilling her the needs and demands of the PLAAF as their primary mission, not to engage in a rat race with the C-2 and A400M. Any export orders on the Y-15 would be a side effect, not the dominant driver of the Y-15's design choices.
Click to expand...
Airframe, aeorofile and fuselage of twin WS-20 engines Y-15 would be different. It would be more like a swept wings. Its main advantage is higher load, enhanced speed, higher altitude and longer range. Due to modern technology it would be ahead of C-2.
Straight wing and winglet turned up at the end would be in 4 turboprop WJ-10 Y-15 to have 35 ton load capacity. Subsequent engine and 8 blade propellers would improve it further.
 
Tomboy

Tomboy

Senior Member
Registered Member
Mekconyov said:
Airframe, aeorofile and fuselage of twin WS-20 engines Y-15 would be different. It would be more like a swept wings. Its main advantage is higher load, enhanced speed, higher altitude and longer range. Due to modern technology it would be ahead of C-2.
Straight wing and winglet turned up at the end would be in 4 turboprop WJ-10 Y-15 to have 35 ton load capacity. Subsequent engine and 8 blade propellers would improve it further.
Click to expand...
Why would PLAAF need that again?
 
A

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Mekconyov said:
Airframe, aeorofile and fuselage of twin WS-20 engines Y-15 would be different. It would be more like a swept wings. Its main advantage is higher load, enhanced speed, higher altitude and longer range. Due to modern technology it would be ahead of C-2.
Straight wing and winglet turned up at the end would be in 4 turboprop WJ-10 Y-15 to have 35 ton load capacity. Subsequent engine and 8 blade propellers would improve it further.
Click to expand...

That aircraft with twin WS-20 engines will not be called Y-15 anymore - It will be an entirely different aircraft model.

Also, with the Y-15 already flying right now, there are no good reasons for the PLAAF to pursue C-2-equivalent airlifters, especially when any cargo that couldn't be ferried by the Y-15 can be ferried by the readily-available Y-20 instead.
 
Last edited:
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Mekconyov said:
Watch for the surprises in airlifters. China want to exceed from Japan's C-2 and they would do it. Y-15 would be larger thab C-2 ie A400M《C-2《Y-15. More over Y-20B elongated one would reach 100 ton where as Y-40 would be in 125-50 tons category.

Definitely Y-15 would be able to carry 45 tons and mostly between 30-45 tons in its final iterations. Reason for 2 WS-20 engines of Y-15 is engines are available, but WJ-10 are in development. Turboprop version would take more time to mature due to development of 8 blade propellers and WJ-10 turboprop engines.

PLAAF is not going to ignore C-2 competition. It is PLAAF VS JSDAF. It all depends upon engines and subsystem assemblies' progress,
Click to expand...
Military airlifters aren't built to exceed, they're built to satisfy requirements. Future interediate transport aircraft can certainly appear, but jet doppelganger in same class is quite wasteful. Il-212 story isn't a reference point here - it's forced development due to failure of original airframe to engine pair. If Russia could, it would rather make Il-112 work, but it won't happen.

We can speculate if something intermediate between Y-15 and Y-20 is needed, of course (like - air assault aircraft), but we have no such indications from PLAAF yet.

US and Russia are interested in intermediate transports at the moment, but this is because there's ongoing shift towards ~100t class transport, and the gap is becoming too wide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top