If the H-20 is a "status symbol" are you trying to say the concept of a long range strategic stealth bomber is obsolete?
If yes then what is the technological successor to the bomber?
For example the jet plane is the technological successor to the airplane......or perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you're saying?
I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
Which again brings the question, how much bigger than the B2, does the H20 have to be, so that it has the range to get near CONUS with atleast some standoff missile payload capacity, and then return afterwards.I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.
A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.
I would say it’s top priority but not a hyper urgent one anymore, so they’re spending a lot of time to get the capabilities right.I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
oh okay. I must of misinterpreted.I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
oh okay. I must of misinterpreted.
yeah I agree.
The H-20 is not a "top priority".
I think right now what the PLAAF needs most is to be able to dominate the first 2 island chains.
The H-20 while nice, is not critical to achieving this goal.
As for "future" goals, that's a different story.
"How much bigger than the B-2" is not a meaningful question when we don't know basic properties of the H-20 like it's planform. Is it a flying wing? Is it a dart/diamond? Is it something entirely new?Which again brings the question, how much bigger than the B2, does the H20 have to be, so that it has the range to get near CONUS with atleast some standoff missile payload capacity, and then return afterwards.
Cause current B2 obviously does not have that range. So, just imitating the B2 in terms of size will not be sufficient.
I wouldn't frame it that way. Those capabilities to attack China would be the target of an overwhelming alpha strike when the balloon goes up. They're not long for this world. Almost immediately, the US would be reduced to long distance submarine raids and the occasional carrier sortie which the PLA's defenses are much more than sufficient to deal with.A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.
The GJ-X is for the Island Chain missions. Think bolder for the H-20. Yes, China can hit them right in the G-spot in this reality.Yeah, it’s a stealth strategic bomber and can hit boomer decision makers right in the G-Spot regarding safety of CONUS, but from China’s POV (at least in this reality) war against US homeland is not really in the cards.
While the U.S. does have the ability t o hit the Chinese with our bombers and the Chinese do not with regard to the CONUS, this ability comes with a very big string attached. Today, we have interests in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. The moment a fleet of bombers start attacking China, we stand to lose all these areas. The asymmetry of power in the Western Pacific in favor of China constrains the hands of the U.S., making these bombers useless when it comes to attacking mainland China. I agree with others that developing the H-20 is lower in priority as the Chinese rightly focus on first and second island chains.A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.