You've touched here on something that we've discussed partially recently -- what types of UAVs are worth procuring en masse.
IMO, one of the key desirable traits for a mature UCAV/UAV force is scale. Scale entails purchase of not only a large number of airframes, but also an extensive logistics and support infrastructure and personnel trained to service said airframes, and the subsystems thereof.
No argument here. A good thing to touch on is what they need in their inventory by 2030 for the air force.
Low/medium altitude, slow moving UCAV supporting army (kind of like Q-5 replacement)
- Needs to be cheap, have long endurance, easy to maintain, have high availability and can operate in high altitude and mountainous regions (Taiwan and Tibet), Does WL-2 have all of that? I don't know. I think they will need something better long term. The other question is how many do they need? Maybe 200? 200 doesn't sound like a lot, but UCAVs should be able to sustain very high block hours per day vs manned aircraft. You might only need 200 to keep 100 in the air at any night.
medium/high altitude, medium/high subsonic UCAV capable of attacking air defense, naval ships and other high intensity environment
- this is where GJ-11/CH-7/FH-97/XQ-58A/Australian ATS fall in
- Need to be very stealthy, have long endurance/range, carry bombs internally, worked in manned/unmanned teaming, conduct EM Warfare, have strong SAR ability
- Out of these attributes, I would much rather have a flywing design like GJ-11 than whatever XQ-58A is. I don't see how something with XQ-58A planform could be more stealthy and have strong EM capability than a flywing planform
- I'd be curious to know the cost of something like XQ-58A vs GJ-11.
- The larger the UCAV gets, the more capable it is, but also a lot more expensive and less flexible. Eventually, UCAV will get so large that it will replace H-20. Maybe there is a sweet spot in cost/capability for UCAV that operates in team with manned aircraft
- Seems like a huge requirement for this type of attacking UCAVs. I'd say several hundred.
medium/high altitude, supersonic UCAV capable of A2A combat as well as A2G missions.
- Anjian UCAV?
- Need to be stealthy, attritable, have lower maintenance and much longer endurance than manned fighter, carry multiple AAMs internally, work in manned/unmanned teaming as well a independently eventually, be able to easily network with other assets
- these are the "shooters" of your air force. They must be able to scramble quickly, have very high availability, can intercept helicopters and attacking UCAVs.
- They are probably dead if a modern fighter jet spots them.
- But they can provide additional radar sensors for your network as well as launch missiles
I think if the PLA bought one brigade's worth of GJ-11 that would be reasonable to develop a seed/core stealthy UCAV capability so as to experiment with subsystems, TTPs, and payload options.
However, I think if they were planning on buying many hundreds of an airframe for the "stealthy strike UCAV" role, I think GJ-11 is a bit small.
Something better yet still attainable with relatively mature technology IMO, would be a larger aircraft powered by an uprated, non AB WS-10 (perhaps even the same engine that is intended for H-20).
I.e.: something the size of Okhotnik-B or X-47B, powered by a non AB WS-10/F100/F110/Al-31/41 class engine, rather than something in the class of Phantom Ray, powered by a non AB WS-13/F404 class engine.
A MTOW of 23-25t, using the same planform as GJ-11, but enlarged, IMO would be a much more capable and future proof yet still technologically feasible airframe to "go big" on.
I agree with all of this. You can keep increasing the thrust (larger engine or more engine) to carry more fuel and payload, but what is the right size? You don't want it to be too large, because then it will be too expensive and not attritable anymore.
If you intend to operate it with just fighter jets, then it would only need maybe 1500 km combat radius and maybe 8 hours endurance at full payload. With 1 non-AB WS-10, could you carry 3t of internal payload with that? Probably
If you intend to operate it with H-20s as well as J-20s, then you'd need 4000 km combat radius. That would require a larger UCAV.
