TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Monty only to a degree, Remember Mi17 is much larger a platform then Z20 should be. this means there are Duties that Mi17 will retain missions or require another platform to replace it.
Z-20 (all variants) thread
- Thread starter delft
- Start date
True, the EH101 and NH90 for instance are closer to the Mi-17's weight class than the S-70 and Z-20 are, it was just a simplified point of comparison that's all.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Size isn't the only reason There is also Configuration. Z20 uses a reverse tricycle configuration of landing gear. the Black hawk And most Attack Chopper use this as well. the Reason is the two forward wheels when combined with oleo strut gear absorb shock for hard landings. but by placing it in a reverse configuration the tail has to be low. this eliminates Clam shell and ramp options. Mi17/Mi8 and Z8 by contrasts use a conventional Tricycle landing gear this means the Tail can be mounted high allowing a opening for a ramp or Clam shell. this allows more effeciant loading and unloading of some types of Cargo and small military vehicles like Quad ATV's. add to this that the PLA does use the Armaments Kit on some of there Mi17's the Armaments kit on Mi17 has a nice advantage over the Blackhawk's and likely the future Z20's as the size of and Shape of Mi17 places the stub wings back clear of any openings. by contrast Blackhawk and Z20 are smaller and don't have the size for such so her stub wings are mounted on top of the sliding doors limiting access to the cabin.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Mi38 is a modernized Mi17. So it's the same family not a true replacement, And the PRC lacks licencing so they would be buying from Russia again.
S92 was not a easy redesign and it's Military version is still a plagued development. Add to this that by creating the S92 the end product is under powered. They took a Pickup truck and matted it to a Camper. the extra weight drags it down.
Following that model with Z20 would do the same.
Besides the PRC also has the AC313 which is scaled to fill the heavier medium lifter role in the future.
In essence This shows that for the Foreseeable the PRC is not going to be changing it's large medium lifters.
Z20 is in my view intended for Ground forces to fill the same rolfe as the S70's they already have.
I argue that Z15 is better suited to the ASW and naval SAR roles but that may be debatable For a VIP chopper it's ready to go.
AC313 is in my view the basis for the next Z8/Z18 series choppers to act as Cargo and utility for the CV16, and AEW until and unless a Fixed wing AEW/Cod platform emerge.
Mi17 /Mi38 will remain inservice with the PLA for sometime to come
with KA27 continuing until the Air frames ware out.
Z9 will continue in some missions (VIP) but it's primary replacements will be Z19 (scouting), Z10 (attack) and HC120( trainer Scout).
S92 was not a easy redesign and it's Military version is still a plagued development. Add to this that by creating the S92 the end product is under powered. They took a Pickup truck and matted it to a Camper. the extra weight drags it down.
Following that model with Z20 would do the same.
Besides the PRC also has the AC313 which is scaled to fill the heavier medium lifter role in the future.
In essence This shows that for the Foreseeable the PRC is not going to be changing it's large medium lifters.
Z20 is in my view intended for Ground forces to fill the same rolfe as the S70's they already have.
I argue that Z15 is better suited to the ASW and naval SAR roles but that may be debatable For a VIP chopper it's ready to go.
AC313 is in my view the basis for the next Z8/Z18 series choppers to act as Cargo and utility for the CV16, and AEW until and unless a Fixed wing AEW/Cod platform emerge.
Mi17 /Mi38 will remain inservice with the PLA for sometime to come
with KA27 continuing until the Air frames ware out.
Z9 will continue in some missions (VIP) but it's primary replacements will be Z19 (scouting), Z10 (attack) and HC120( trainer Scout).
The Mi-17 is a modernized Mi-8, which itself first flew in 1962. The Mi-38 is clearly a new design, not a modernized Mi-17. It and its descendants might well remain in production for another fifty years and China might decide that licence production is better than waiting for a Chinese design for this size helicopter. On the other hand importing Mi-38's until a Chinese design replaces it seems more probable.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
.... Rechecking and your right. but has the PRC placed a Single order for Mi38? and I am not sure it will be as as shining a success as the next 50 years. Remember the Russians are still actively developing Helicopters and systems in that same weight class. And As we have seen the Avic people can still pull rabbits to.
True.It's too early to tell whether Mi-38 will be successful and China, which a few years ago was nowhere, is bound to become a major user and producer of helicopters. But China will have to develop many sizes of helicopters and, while this size is important and might be a likely candidate for the development of Chinese design, it is possible that the decision will be made to select other sizes for development. That would be the case if the design of Mi-38 is considered to be very promising and when the production technology is not too different from that available in China. If Mi-38 cannot be easily adapted to Chinese production methods then it will not be produced under licence. I read that Mi-17 was to be produced in China but I do understand that has not yet happened. This suggests that Mi-38 will also not be produced under licence and that at some time a Chinese design of the same size will appear.
China actually did try to produce the Mi-17 a few years ago,but they realized two things:
1. the Mi-17 is an old design which could no longer meet the needs,both military and civillen
2. the Mi-17 imported from Russia is much cheaper than the local one.Remember,produce something is not just assemble
it,but needs a lot of money to set the extral sub-systerms factory and then put the sub-systems together.Also,there are other
reasons like to protect the local helo industry...,but the cost-effect is a major reason.
1. the Mi-17 is an old design which could no longer meet the needs,both military and civillen
2. the Mi-17 imported from Russia is much cheaper than the local one.Remember,produce something is not just assemble
it,but needs a lot of money to set the extral sub-systerms factory and then put the sub-systems together.Also,there are other
reasons like to protect the local helo industry...,but the cost-effect is a major reason.
It is earlier cost effective when most of the production processes necessary are already available in the licencee country. I would imagine that the production processes for MiG-29 and Flanker are very similar and that these didn't play a role in choosing which to adopt for PLAAF. And that these took quite an effort to absorb but that that was thought to be worthwhile. It might on the other hand be that some parts of Mi-17 production are not easily absorbed ( main gearbox ? ) and that might be the reason licensed built Mi-17 remained too expensive. In this matter I can only speculate. Does anyone among know?