Z-20


TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Well is the statement wrong?

Doctrine and specification wise Z20 is a clone of S70. It’s shape and structure clearly were designed off the S70. However the way they got to that result is where it differs.
The Chinese don’t have access to the same systems as the US and adapted the design to their capabilities and wants. Most competing products do that. Take a well know system even trying to sample it then built to equal if not improve on it.

When The west first saw Mig25 they thought it was a super fighter with a set of capabilities so they built F15 to match it. Their assumptions proved wrong on its capabilities but by then the Russians saw F15 and started on SU27 trying to match F15. The US started on the Shuttle so the Russians started on Buran. The Russians saw Cobra so they built Hind. Then Apache so Havoc.
 
Last edited:

Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Well is the statement wrong?

Doctrine and specification wise Z20 is a clone of S70. It’s shape and structure clearly were designed off the S70. However the way they got to that result is where it differs.
The Chinese don’t have access to the same systems as the US and adapted the design to their capabilities and wants. Most competing products do that. Take a well know system even trying to sample it then built to equal if not improve on it.

When The west first saw Mig25 they thought it was a super fighter with a set of capabilities so they built F15 to match it. Their assumptions proved wrong on its capabilities but by then the Russians saw F15 and started on SU27 trying to match F15. The US started on the Shuttle so the Russians started on Buran. The Russians saw Cobra so they built Hind. Then Apache so Havoc.

Well the part that voyager quoted is incorrect in reference to what sheogorath predicted.

Instead, the correct part to quote would be how half the article is basically talking about the US stealthy Blackhawk airframe and how the remnants of the tail was therefore virtually the whole basis for how the PLA would develop a stealthy Z-20 of their own.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Junior Member
Registered Member
Well is the statement wrong?

Doctrine and specification wise Z20 is a clone of S70. It’s shape and structure clearly were designed off the S70. However the way they got to that result is where it differs.
The Chinese don’t have access to the same systems as the US and adapted the design to their capabilities and wants. Most competing products do that. Take a well know system even trying to sample it then built to equal if not improve on it.

When The west first saw Mig25 they thought it was a super fighter with a set of capabilities so they built F15 to match it. Their assumptions proved wrong on its capabilities but by then the Russians saw F15 and started on SU27 trying to match F15. The US started on the Shuttle so the Russians started on Buran. The Russians saw Cobra so they built Hind. Then Apache so Havoc.
To be fair, when people say something is a copy of something, they refer to the aesthetics, specs, and technological aspects. So, in that context, the statement by that article is narrowminded and unproven. Blitzo's correction of voyager's quote is on point.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Since the tail we see on the model is clearly not that of the Crashed Ghosthawk. (Can be seen on the other set of photos resembling the stock Z20)
I think the Chinese likely did study as much as possible but made changes to suit their own capabilities. As seen on the model they have the same kind of ducted exhaust system depicted on the model as found on RAH66.

As for the copy thing I understand how it has become a nerve point for our more Sinocentric members but I have seen some here call the US Hypersonic work copies of the Chinese work. To a point they are not entirely wrong it’s just a question of how deep are we talking There are and have been Copy Copies of system made by militaries on the past the TU4 for example. Then their and inspired copies like the Ford Bronco vs the Jeep Wrangler.
 

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
At the end you can only change so much stuff on a helicopter and on making it "stealth" before your design starts looking a bit similar to another helicopter.

I am sure the Chinese studied the crushed black hawk, and why not? It surely saved them time, and reduced R&D risk

I also disagree that this new design will be a "clone" as the Chinese have their own mature aeronautic industry which would provide their own ideas and improvements.

To make an analogy, this Black Hawk comparison, I see it more as using an open source program. You can take bits and pieces from here and there as another person did the hard work on theses sections and expand on their work by adding new functionality on top or more functionality next to it
 

cn_habs

Junior Member
Some nice screen grabs.

51195929610_d2ee478db0_k.jpg

51195929620_95b659b511_k.jpg

51194865151_6e5032b479_k.jpg

51195078028_3157c8376d_k.jpg

51195638209_d66aaae45f_k.jpg
I don't see any .50 calibre machine guns on those Z-20's. Isn't that the easiest way to provide decent air support before letting the soldiers off?
 

Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
As for the copy thing I understand how it has become a nerve point for our more Sinocentric members but I have seen some here call the US Hypersonic work copies of the Chinese work. To a point they are not entirely wrong it’s just a question of how deep are we talking There are and have been Copy Copies of system made by militaries on the past the TU4 for example. Then their and inspired copies like the Ford Bronco vs the Jeep Wrangler.

The difference is that members here do not run websites espousing those talking points for years and years to a point where it approaches a shorthand for journalistic or indeed deductive laziness.

Frankly I'm not sure why you're taking exception to this instance of criticism, because of all the things to write about in context of a potential stealthy Z-20 project, spending that much word count on the crashed stealth blackhawk and espionage is a bit of a red flag and narratively self limiting as well.
 

sheogorath

New Member
Registered Member
Impressive! Are you a foreteller or what...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Western analysts have become so predictable when it comes to anything China and Russia.

Though, to be fair, I kind of expected such an article to be written by the weasel-faced propagandist Joseph Trevithick, since he is the resident jingoist, think tankie and Pentagon fanboy and for him, everything everybody else makes is shit compared to even failed projects of the mighty US of A.

Didn't expect Tyler to be the one, alas...
 

daifo

Junior Member
Registered Member
Western analysts have become so predictable when it comes to anything China and Russia.

Though, to be fair, I kind of expected such an article to be written by the weasel-faced propagandist Joseph Trevithick, since he is the resident jingoist, think tankie and Pentagon fanboy and for him, everything everybody else makes is shit compared to even failed projects of the mighty US of A.

Didn't expect Tyler to be the one, alas...

I think Tyler is worst , i remember when there was a video/pic of a massive PLAN fleet in a harbor sheltering from a storm/typhoon, he tweeted in a mocking fashion of sinking that fleet
 

by78

Lieutenant General
I don't see any .50 calibre machine guns on those Z-20's. Isn't that the easiest way to provide decent air support before letting the soldiers off?

They might not have settled on a design for the gun mount yet. Below are images of three proposed designs: two are mounted on adjustable rails (similar to car seats), and one is a simple swivel arm on a fixed plate.

51218853430_dbf4b8629e_o.jpg

51218548634_0bbcb8a807_o.jpg

51217786681_16c340f6b3_o.jpg
 

Top