Some additional thoughts on the GJ-X:
1. This thing is a big deal. A B-21 sized stealth UCAV for the PLAAF is not on anyone's radar. Unmanned+A2B2 VLO stealth+potentially very long IWB makes the GJ-X the most futuristic aircraft in the world in my opinion.
2. The most similar aircraft to it is the B-21. Aviation week puts the B-21's wingspan at 40m but I have also seen estimates at 45m. This would make the B-21 either slightly smaller, the same or slightly bigger than the GJ-X. The B-21's straight leading edge is the gold standard for stealth but the cranked kite is extremely good as well. Think 24 carat gold vs 20 carat gold.
3. If we assume a MTOW around 80 ton, and the thrust requirement is about 25 to 30% of the MTOW, we are looking at 20-24 tons of thrust. Unlike the B-21 the engines of the GJ-X seems to be on the centerline and thus likely the thickest part of the airframe. That would make WS-18/D-30 or even the 2.2m diameter WS-20 candidates for propulsion. I think no-afterburner WS-10 or WS-15 with no change to bypass ratio are less likely given that specific fuel consumption are critical to the range and operational reach of bombers.
View attachment 161002
4. Being unmanned saves a lot of space for weapons and fuel. Even assuming less efficient engines, the GJ-X would likely have B-21-class range and payload. This is a true peer and symetrical counter to the B-21. I made this graph a while ago which I think mostly still stands. I would guess the GJ-X fills the Hawaii/Australia bomber role.
View attachment 161003
5. A major benefit of the cranked kite configuration is longer fuselage and thus potentially longer weapon bays. This is consistent with recent rumors suggesting a PLAAF requirement to integrate long missiles for its strategic bombers. However, I seriously doubt JingLei-1 or other missiles of its length/range-class would be integrated given its long stand-off range is a poor use of VLO bombers.
6. Since GJ-X is unmanned, its more acceptable for it to go on suicide missions. This would make nuclear bombing with
several dozens of B-61 style gravity bombs against CONUS a real possibility.
7. How does the GJ-X impact the H-20 program? I think the existence of a unmanned Hawaii/Australia bomber implies that the H-20 will be more optimized for CONUS missions. This might mean an unrefueled combat radius enough to launch stand-off HCM against CONUS targets or penetration of NORAD with only one refueling. Notably, the GJ-X could potentially be used as a stealth tanker which would give the H-20 or other GJ-X global reach. The fact that the PLA is heavily investing in subsonic A2B2 VLO as a penetration strategy should also put an end to any suggestion that the H-20 will be supersonic.
8. As for how the GJ-X will be used, allow me to advertise for my infographic
here. The GJ-X fits in the same role as I described for the H-20.
9. For math/statistics nerds: The emergence of the GJ-X is Bayesian evidence that allow us to update the prior distribution of our estimate of China's bomber/large aircraft industrial base by significantly increase the mean and reducing the standard deviation. In other words, we now have higher certainty of very strong capability of the Chinese defense industrial base. I would now be less surprised if China builds e.g. a flying wing C-5 class transporter or a 250 ton MTOW H-20.