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

[AndrewS]

alright, so I think it's interesting to consider what additional capabilities they can put into H-20 that does not already exist in J-36 or the large bomber type of UCAV that we saw recently or may discover in the future.

Since it is most likely manned, there are penalties with regard to what that entails. So, it is likely larger than anything we've seen. I think the fuselage would need to be a lot larger than GJ-X to accommodate the pilot related stuff and an even larger IWB + likely 4 engines.

It is likely to be able to reach supersonic speed. Range is unclear. Depends on how larger this will turn out to be.

I'm sure they will be able to hold at 1 MOAB type of bunker buster or maybe even 2 (so 20t payload and possibly even higher)

It would need to be able to carry 1 large ALBM internally that can be nuclear tipped. If it can launch at supersonic speed and the missile goes ballistic path, maybe 7000 km range (how far can a DF-26D sized missile launched from high altitude flying at mach1.4 go?) Maybe if it follows HGV trajectory, then range will be shorter like 5000-6000 km. IDK.

On a single large ALBM carried by an H-20.

Wouldn't a DF-26 type missile (20tonnes?) be the absolute limit of what could be carried? That would also represent the upper end of the cost.

And if we look at the DF-26, over 500 missiles have already been built, primarily for targets at 2IC distances.

---

So if we look at the potential target set in the 3IC and beyond, it's a lot larger (and much higher value) than what is in the 2IC. So it would be logical to also build at least 500 large ALBMs for these targets.

That is a large enough production run to justify a bespoke ALBM design for internal carriage by the H-20 stealth bomber, rather than reuse the existing Jing Lei-1 missile.

EDIT
I'm also thinking of the DF-17, (5tonnes?) and likely costs ~$2 Million.
That implies a DF-26 or an H-20 ALBM would cost less than $8 Million

 

[vincent]

It would need to be able to carry 1 large ALBM internally that can be nuclear tipped. If it can launch at supersonic speed and the missile goes ballistic path, maybe 7000 km range (how far can a DF-26D sized missile launched from high altitude flying at mach1.4 go?) Maybe if it follows HGV trajectory, then range will be shorter like 5000-6000 km. IDK.

Why plan around HGV/ALBM and not HCM? HCM is likely much smaller.

 

[AndrewS]

Why plan around HGV/ALBM and not HCM? HCM is likely much smaller.

Wouldn't an HGV/ALBM be travelling at Mach 18+, whereas an air breathing HCM would be at Mach ~8?

And why not develop both? China does appear to have the engineering talent, financial resources and industrial capacity to do this

So you design the airframe for a high-end HGV/ALBM for critical targets.
But there shouldn't be any obstacle to installing an internal rotary launcher (like the B-2) for a more affordable HCM, subsonic cruise missiles, glide bombs, etc etc

 

[vincent]

Wouldn't an HGV/ALBM be travelling at Mach 18+, whereas an air breathing HCM would be at Mach ~8?

And why not develop both? China does appear to have the engineering talent, financial resources and industrial capacity to do this

So you design the airframe for a high-end HGV/ALBM for critical targets.
But there shouldn't be any obstacle to installing an internal rotary launcher (like the B-2) for a more affordable HCM, subsonic cruise missiles, glide bombs, etc etc

Because to accommodate HGV/ALBM require too many design compromise like size, plane form, engine, range, etc? To have IWB with length that can fit HCM a notional H20 can be a slightly enlarge B2. To accommodate HGV/ALBM the H20 needs to have a cranked kite form which has worst stealth.

 

[tamsen_ikard]

JL-1 8000km is pretty insane. It can basically be an ICBM, go straight from Chinese airspace to almost continental US. There is no deep penetration needed, the bomber can stay in 1st island chain. No reason it is a one way trip. In fact the bomber is just a reusable first stage missile that safely return to the country. It is barely a 'bomber' anymore, it do not drop anything, it shoots.

Lets say we have JL-2 instead. Because JL-1 is already kinda old, and H-20 is not even out. It is plausible we would have a new missile that better fits weapon bay of steath aircraft, while retaining most of JL-1 capability, if not better. And there is no pressure to make those, there is still many years til H-20 enter service!

I don't think just being able to hit west coast cuts it. China would want its air launched nuclear arm to be able to hit all of CONUS all the way upto Florida.

Moreover, there should be enough range for the plane to be able get into position to launch its missile without using any other countries Air space. Ideally, in the sea of Japan or pass the Miyako into deep pacific.

 

[AndrewS]

Because to accommodate HGV/ALBM require too many design compromise like size, plane form, engine, range, etc? To have IWB with length that can fit HCM a notional H20 can be a slightly enlarge B2. To accommodate HGV/ALBM the H20 needs to have a cranked kite form which has worst stealth.

Part of the HGV/ALBM requirement is because they have a lot more range?

In the Pacific Ocean, range (the airframe combined with the weapon) is a key requirement.

---

I don't see a cranked kite as having the "worst" stealth.

I think the tradeoff is acceptable given that the vast majority of the Pacific is completely empty ocean

 

[TK3600]

alright, so I think it's interesting to consider what additional capabilities they can put into H-20 that does not already exist in J-36 or the large bomber type of UCAV that we saw recently or may discover in the future.

Since it is most likely manned, there are penalties with regard to what that entails. So, it is likely larger than anything we've seen. I think the fuselage would need to be a lot larger than GJ-X to accommodate the pilot related stuff and an even larger IWB + likely 4 engines.

It is likely to be able to reach supersonic speed. Range is unclear. Depends on how larger this will turn out to be.

I'm sure they will be able to hold at 1 MOAB type of bunker buster or maybe even 2 (so 20t payload and possibly even higher)

It would need to be able to carry 1 large ALBM internally that can be nuclear tipped. If it can launch at supersonic speed and the missile goes ballistic path, maybe 7000 km range (how far can a DF-26D sized missile launched from high altitude flying at mach1.4 go?) Maybe if it follows HGV trajectory, then range will be shorter like 5000-6000 km. IDK.

Question, did we ever see a large bomber UCAV? Gj-11 and likes are not exactly large. It would have to be larger than J-16 at least.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Question, did we ever see a large bomber UCAV? Gj-11 and likes are not exactly large. It would have to be larger than J-16 at least.

Uh, that would be the GJ-X.

 

[charles18]

Wouldn't an HGV/ALBM be travelling at Mach 18+, whereas an air breathing HCM would be at Mach ~8?

Speed is nice but it does have diminishing returns.
For example:
A mach 5 missile compared to mach 1 brings a lot of extra value to the table.
but
A mach 18 missile compared to mach 8 brings very little.

Does the value that a mach 18 missile have supersede the problems that come with it?
I think the answer is no.
Space is a valuable commodity in short supply on an aircraft.

 

[qwerty3173]

Why plan around HGV/ALBM and not HCM? HCM is likely much smaller.

The difference is a lot with range, as even very large HCM does not do very well against constant air resistance. A CJ1000 sized very large ground launched HCM still cannot expect more range than around 4000km.