CH-7 is for export.
Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G) thread
- Thread starter VESSEL
- Start date
They are in different size categories. This thing has double the wingspan of CH-7.
As for whether CH-7 has a role in the PLA -- to begin with, even before this thing emerged, it should have been asked whether CH-7 had a role in the PLA.
CH-7 isn't that special after all, it's just a flying wing stealthy UAV/UCAV airframe, and it was advertised as an export product to begin with rather than a primary PLA program. There was never a guarantee that CH-7 would enter PLA service.
I recommend people to think more broadly about the "stealthy flying wing UAV/UCAV" style airframe. They aren't that unique now, and chances are the PRC has a dozen such airframes of credible but varying airframe sizes and roles in various stages of development, and we know about a few of them (GJ-11 family, CH-7, past smaller size flying wing tech demos, this new 52m wingspan monster)
There's no reason for this thing to be equipped with weapons.
The PLA will have fairly plentiful strike systems (long range missiles of both ballistic and air breathing variety, as well as aircraft) and also stealthy flying wing strike systems (UCAVs, likely H-20 in the future as well).
But having a persistent and survivable and long range ISR platform on the other hand is a capability gap that would benefit from an optimized and specialized airframe.
It's not about a "longer wing" it is about its overall configuration as a flying wing with signature reduction design features.
Said signature reduction in turn lends itself to survivability.
RQ-180 and this new PLA flying wing UAV (I'll call it WZ-X for now) are flying wings with significant signature reduction. In other words, RQ-180 and WZ-X are much more survivable in high intensity conflict scenarios, and against lesser opponents they would be very difficult to detect let alone engage in context of a proper multi-domain war.
WZ-9 otoh, is not particularly oriented to signature reduction and in a high intensity conflict would not be able to operate far beyond its home airspace if it wanted to survive.
Not a chance. The tea pot is the manned 6th gen fighter. Teacups are the CCA and reputable sources suggested that teacups are essentially fighter sized and performance level just without pilots. Teacups are also supersonic. This UAV is clearly subsonic and designed for range/loiter time. It's also not going to be great at turning just like the B-2, B-21, GJ-11 and that Russian "hunter" drone.
why wouldn't this be equipped with weapons. CH-7 is also optimised for stealth if one considers the WZ-7, WZ-8 and WZ-9 to be too observable and less survivable in various ways. Well the CH-7 is there to fill in the role you expect from this platform. If range is the question, this aircraft looks like it has intercontinental range if it's not carrying significant air to ground payload. It's B-2 sized. Larger than a B-21. China does not need that sort of ISR range on redundunt inter-atmosphere platforms unless its shooter platforms are going over to the US.
Loiter time and range of CH-7 covers more than what China needs out of a stealth ISR platform. We should remember that China can build many hundreds of CH-7 if it wanted to and achieve the required sortie rates. I don't see PLAN operating outside the second island chain from a strategic needs perspective. CH-7 covers this. ISR drones are getting onto LHAs and the Fujian. Not to mention WZ-8 is H-6 launched which gives you a second long reach, redundunt, inter-atmosphere ISR backup if all satellites are down.
I would speculate that this thing is evaluating a role for low end unmanned H-20. Perhaps even recycling some elements of preliminary experimental designs from the H-20 program and adapted for unmanned. Think of it has a super long range GJ-11. GJ-11 flies faster judging by its WS-13/WS-21 non afterburning variant engine and wing sweep angle. PLA is missing a strategic ranged stealth strike UAV. GJ-11 doesn't have the range to fly into New Delhi and back. This thing can fly to Kerala and back... to Liaoning. It has a sweep angle even more optimised for range and lift than the B-2's.
I'm not inherently against the idea of this thing having any sort of weapons bay, for example, maybe one or two very small weapons bays for a couple of SDB sized weapons.
But this thing would be wasted as a striker -- the central fuselage is far too small to accommodate any meaningful payload.
Also, the PLA has plentiful other methods of conducting long range strike both now and into the future.
Doing 12-24 hour ISR missions at second island chain distances, while operating from safe(r) airbases within the Chinese mainland, would certainly require an aircraft of this size.
The importance of survivable, long range, long endurance and persistent ISR and networking nodes cannot be underestimated in a high end conflict.
If anything I would say for the PLA at present, having a robust westpac (2nd island chain distance) persistent and survivable ISR platform is more important to them than having a symbolic token intercontinental strike capability.
The platforms you are talking about do not have the range or persistence for the sort of westpac missions the PLA will want to do.
CH-7 at 10 tons is too small as a long endurance and long range platform.
WZ-8 is too primitive for long term use -- I expect WZ-8 in coming years to be replaced by a more capable, more conventional high speed ISR UAV solution.
003 and 076 carrying some ISR drones is fine, but they are also dependent on their carriers and should be viewed as complementary to true high end strategic ISR.
If they wanted this thing to be strike oriented, it would likely have a larger central fuselage relative to its overall wing/size.
That said, I'm not opposed to the idea of a larger "super GJ-11" -- but its planform geometry would probably not look like this WZ-X and be more like B-21 or B-2 instead in terms of proportions.
Plus, an interesting note - The RQ-180 (which should have similar roles to the aforementioned UAV at Malan) is estimated to have a wingspan of about 40 meters.
Needless to say, this WZ-X UAV is way bigger - In fact, the WZ-X is the biggest military UAV in the world right now.
Last edited:
To put it simply - The RQ-180 and this WZ-X are meant for theater/strategic ISR, whereas the WZ-9 is meant for AEW.
Not that I'm against a VLO, large strike UCAV with strategic/intercontinental-range capabilities (I'm actually looking forward to such aircrafts) - But this isn't it.
By rough measurements based on the satellite imagery, and with the given wingspan in the TWZ article (which is 52 meters) - Doing some simple calculations yielded a length of just about 14 meters.
14 meters is actually shorter than the B-2 (21 meters), and even shorter than its smaller counterpart i.e. B-21 (~16 meters) by about 2 meters. In fact, this WZ-X is roughly the same length as the GJ-11, which is only has 2 tons of payload capacity inside its two, small IWB bays.
If China wants a VLO, large strike UCAV with strategic/intercontinental-range capabilities, then it'll need to be longer as well to fit longer/larger IWB(s). Otherwise - Why bother flying across the Pacific to only drop guided bombs and smaller missiles?
Last edited:
To be fair the WZ-9 can probably do theater/strategic ISR as well -- I wouldn't be surprised if its radar was capable of air to surface surveillance (particularly SAR), and as a large aircraft it possesses a fair bit of range and endurance as well.
IMO the most significant difference between RQ-180 and WZ-X versus WZ-9 (or say, global hawk) is that RQ-180 and WZ-X are meant to be much more survivable by way of signature reduction.