Missiles with the caliber of CJ-10 are a bit of a stretch. At best, it can launch some YJ-15s, AKF-98s, and the ABMs that were shown at last Zhuhai airshow.
View attachment 166204
I think people are just too emotionally invested in this thing due to its cool factor that they are missing it’s key problem, which ironically enough, is very well demonstrated by the catalogue of ideas being thrown out for how to use it effectively.
The Jetank/Jiutian’s greatest strength is also its greatest weakness when it comes to frontline combat operational use - its great size makes it expensive and high value, which is the opposite of what UCAVs should be, especially since it lacks the saving grace of stealth to give it sufficient survivability to sufficiently mitigate the risk of investing so much into one platform.
So you have the core contradiction of having a big, slow, none-stealthy, expensive platform that cannot survive on its own in high or even medium threat combat environments that needs to be in combat to justify its existence. So it either needs to stay out of frontline combat roles, in which case why do you need to spend so much money on it instead of buying less cool but far cheaper alternatives; or you need to invest in even more assets to protected it in frontline combat, at which point the obvious question is how is this any cheaper or different than just using existing manned platforms?
The sales pitch should be to focus on its strengths to mitigate its costs. One of the core benefits of an unmanned platform is time on station. So obvious roles for it would be MPA/ASW, which dovetails nicely with its long range and heavy payload capabilities as it can carry torpedos for such roles both internally and on external pylons. Additionally, it can carry a large missile payload for anti-drone boat combat operations, which I suspect will be needed seeing how in vogue that is in the west with Ukraine. China has a long coastline, so that is a genuine niche the Jetank can fill very effectively. But the obvious challenge would be whether it’s better to have one Jetank doing this role or 5 cheaper UCAVs. But either way, if I was in charge, I would prioritise on slapping some air refuelling capacity onto this thing to really set it head and shoulders above the competition.
Other similar roles it can perform would be island denial operations aimed squarely at the U.S. marines island hopping strategy. The idea is that sure you can sneak marines onto remote islands, and it would be cost prohibitive to dig them out with conventional means. But park a Jetank over those islands and those marines are either toast or completely neutralised. Since they need to remain hiding to not get immediately drone-struck, and if they are all hiding in caves all the time, they can’t pose any threats to anyone. With enough Jetanks, the PLA can set up a 24/7 rotating overhead presence and any US marines let alive on those islands can wave the white flag and surrender to the drones or they can die slowly of thirst or starvation in their holes. No need to send PLA marines in to dig them out as the Americans are hoping for.
These are the kind of missions the Jetank should be positioning itself to take, not to try to be the new age A10 or mini-bomber. It’s not fit for tip of the spear operations, but then a well balanced military only needs a very small edge, the overwhelming majority of the volume and weight is the shaft behind the speartip. Don’t try to force this thing to be something it cannot be and play to its own strengths if you want to find for truly useful niche for it.
