H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)

I mean apparently the new transport is Y-15 instead of Y-30 so like I don't think we should read too much into the numbers. There doesn't seem to be any actual rules so best just wait and see.

Tomboy said:

You don't typically change the designation of a project unless there has been major changes in detail, or completely reworked. If true this could mean big implications for the project.

Unlike with the Army, no known new designation system has been implemented for the Airforce, so it's not as simple as changing the name to conform to new standards.

Click to expand...

Well, the name Y-30 was associated with the new tactical transport for ages (partly because it was shown as a model at Zhuhai with "Y-30" on its tail), but it ended up being Y-15, and largely looking identical to the original expected vision.

So whether a name change actually can entail major changes or not, imo is not definite.
Any 2x2 permutation of "yes/no name change" and "yes/no major change to platform" sounds viable to me.

Blitzo said:

Well, the name Y-30 was associated with the new tactical transport for ages (partly because it was shown as a model at Zhuhai with "Y-30" on its tail), but it ended up being Y-15, and largely looking identical to the original expected vision.

Click to expand...

Y-30 was never an actual PLA designation, as explained in a episode of Chahuahui(or it might be 将军's video), it was initially just called Y-30 just due to the fact it's design payload is 30t and iirc it at the time had basically the same status as FC-31.

Tomboy said:

Y-30 was never an actual PLA designation, as explained in a episode of Chahuahui(or it might be 将军's video), it was initially just called Y-30 just due to the fact it's design payload is 30t and iirc it at the time had basically the same status as FC-31.

Click to expand...

In that case, are there any examples to the contrary (of projects that have had initial official designations changed due to significant rework)?
I cannot think of any myself, including if it is for the aerospace domain that one thinks of specifically.

Now, I personally do expect that the project itself has undergone major revisions which has been a reflection of the rumours in the last half decade -- but whether that is tied to the name or not, is a toss up. There's not enough of a pattern to the madness to establish that as a link.