Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G) thread

[Blitzo]

Made a quick comparison for reference.

View attachment 161000

Nice comparison.

Both GJ-X and WZ-X are sized perfectly for long endurance strike and ISR missions at second island chain distances respectively, with GJ-X of course more oriented for payload and WZ-X more oriented for loitering, but both still would be quite impressive in both domains by virtue of their size and configuration.

A persistent, stealthy long range strike and ISR capability for re-attack, BDA, and persistent surface monitoring, have been gaps in the overall PLA 2IC strike strategy for a while, and it's been obvious that UAVs would be one major prong in filling that gap.
It's almost remarkable how well sized these two platforms are for that role.


Given GJ-X's size I actually wonder if it may be powered by two non AB WS-10s in the same way as we've suspected for WZ-X.

GJ-X is very very large for a strike UCAV, I imagine it is as big as B-21, if not bigger.

 

[Maikeru]

Nice comparison.

Both GJ-X and WZ-X are sized perfectly for long endurance strike and ISR missions at second island chain distances respectively, with GJ-X of course more oriented for payload and WZ-X more oriented for loitering, but both still would be quite impressive in both domains by virtue of their size and configuration.

A persistent, stealthy long range strike and ISR capability for re-attack, BDA, and persistent surface monitoring, have been gaps in the overall PLA 2IC strike strategy for a while, and it's been obvious that UAVs would be one major prong in filling that gap.
It's almost remarkable how well sized these two platforms are for that role.


Given GJ-X's size I actually wonder if it may be powered by two non AB WS-10s in the same way as we've suspected for WZ-X.

GJ-X is very very large for a strike UCAV, I imagine it is as big as B-21, if not bigger.

From AvWeek, via Wiki, B-21 stats:

General characteristics

Crew: 2
Length: 54 ft (16 m)
Wingspan: 132 ft (40 m)
Empty weight: 70,000 lb (31,751 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 180,000 lb (81,647 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney PW9000 non-afterburning turbofans, 27,000 lbf (120 kN) thrust each
Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 0.8+
Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,000 m)
Armament

Hardpoints: 1 × main weapons bay with a capacity of 20,000 lb (9,100 kg) weapon load
Missiles: AGM-181 LRSO
Bombs: JDAM family of munitions

So yes, by the looks of it, GJ-X is slightly bigger. Just going by the design I imagine somewhat faster but not quite as stealthy as a B-21.

 

[TheWanderWit]

Nice comparison.

Both GJ-X and WZ-X are sized perfectly for long endurance strike and ISR missions at second island chain distances respectively, with GJ-X of course more oriented for payload and WZ-X more oriented for loitering, but both still would be quite impressive in both domains by virtue of their size and configuration.

A persistent, stealthy long range strike and ISR capability for re-attack, BDA, and persistent surface monitoring, have been gaps in the overall PLA 2IC strike strategy for a while, and it's been obvious that UAVs would be one major prong in filling that gap.
It's almost remarkable how well sized these two platforms are for that role.


Given GJ-X's size I actually wonder if it may be powered by two non AB WS-10s in the same way as we've suspected for WZ-X.

GJ-X is very very large for a strike UCAV, I imagine it is as big as B-21, if not bigger.

It is bigger assuming the dimensions are correct. The GJ-X is listed here as 42m wingspan and 24m length, B-21 is 40m wingspan and 16m length. Given seeing these two new large flying-wings from China that they're developing, I think this dispels any notion that China couldn't make a B-2/B-21 sized flying-wing bomber.

I think it also could support the current rumors of the H-20 having a completely different design planform compared to a typical flying-wing for the last few decades as thought, but I won't go into that given this thread and what was just stated in the H-20 thread.

 

[ougoah]

If GJ-11/21 are medium altitude - medium endurance strike and ISR stealth UAVs then these longer wingspan, shorter length to wingspan ratio flying wings are high altitude capable - long endurance strike and ISR stealth UAVs.

Manned platform in H-20, unmanned platforms would be expected to significantly outnumber manned. Since GJ-11/21 is vastly more limited in range compared to H-20 which is expected to be strategic ie intercontinental ranged, then these new UAVs could be the long range strike and ISR platforms for the stealth end of the PLA's UAV arsenal. CH-7 is ISR only. These two (B-21 wingspan and the latest diamond fuselage) could be long range strike oriented. You don't need that many types of stealth, long range and endurance ISR UAVs.

There's already WZ-7, WZ-8, WZ-9, WZ-10, and CH-7 for HALE ISR with WZ-8 and CH-7 as stealth platforms.

Only GJ-11 satisfies the requirement for stealth strike and even then it's not able to operate at 2nd island chain from coastal base (not counting GJ-21 carrier version because it has carrier's range). PLA was missing long range, unmanned, stealth strike UAV. There must be at least one. These look like they have at least 3000km operational radius with those sweep angles and wingspan.

Air superiority side is covered by the UADFs.

China is absolutely lapping the US not just once. The US hasn't even got a single stealth strike UAV even of medium range yet. They want their tiny CCAs to perform strike. Probably smarter than getting those jokes (college level projects) to perform air superiority. Chinese UADFs are supersonic and use 140KN engines while US CCAs that are still just getting into flight testing are using 30KN engines or less. Within 10 years China would be 1 generation ahead of the US in manned air superiority and 2.5 generations ahead in unmanned. It's already 1.5 generation ahead of US in unmanned.

US has no GJ-11 equivalent. US has nowhere near a UADF that approaches the shadow of Type A and Type B. This is a 1,5 gen lag since US hasn't even managed to field a single 0.5 gen small CCA. By the time their small CCAs are operational, Type A and Type B would have successors.

Overtaking point has happened a while ago but it isn't clear yet because China is still amassing equal size. But China's platforms are more modern now. Even in the air where US is keen to maintain their usual gap. They've failed already. Only possible gap is submarines and even there China's caught up in base tech. US hasn't moved forward much in the last 20 years to be honest whereas China's been absolutely exponential.

 

[Maikeru]

I'm wondering if what we're looking at is actually the "H"(i.e. GJ)-20??

 

[Blitzo]

If GJ-11/21 are medium altitude - medium endurance strike and ISR stealth UAVs then these longer wingspan, shorter length to wingspan ratio flying wings are high altitude capable - long endurance strike and ISR stealth UAVs.

GJ-11/21 are almost definitely not medium altitude.
Medium altitude tends to be the domain of propeller UAVs.

GJ-11/21 should be high altitude, long endurance stealthy strike UAVs, but with lower payload and lower range than GJ-X and WZ-X.

Manned platform in H-20, unmanned platforms would be expected to significantly outnumber manned. Since GJ-11/21 is vastly more limited in range compared to H-20 which is expected to be strategic ie intercontinental ranged, then these new UAVs could be the long range strike and ISR platforms for the stealth end of the PLA's UAV arsenal. CH-7 is ISR only. These two (B-21 wingspan and the latest diamond fuselage) could be long range strike oriented. You don't need that many types of stealth, long range and endurance ISR UAVs.

There's already WZ-7, WZ-8, WZ-9, WZ-10, and CH-7 for HALE ISR with WZ-8 and CH-7 as stealth platforms.

Only GJ-11 satisfies the requirement for stealth strike and even then it's not able to operate at 2nd island chain from coastal base (not counting GJ-21 carrier version because it has carrier's range). PLA was missing long range, unmanned, stealth strike UAV. There must be at least one. These look like they have at least 3000km operational radius with those sweep angles and wingspan.

Air superiority side is covered by the UADFs.

China is absolutely lapping the US not just once. The US hasn't even got a single stealth strike UAV even of medium range yet. They want their tiny CCAs to perform strike. Probably smarter than getting those jokes (college level projects) to perform air superiority. Chinese UADFs are supersonic and use 140KN engines while US CCAs that are still just getting into flight testing are using 30KN engines or less. Within 10 years China would be 1 generation ahead of the US in manned air superiority and 2.5 generations ahead in unmanned. It's already 1.5 generation ahead of US in unmanned.

US has no GJ-11 equivalent. US has nowhere near a UADF that approaches the shadow of Type A and Type B. This is a 1,5 gen lag since US hasn't even managed to field a single 0.5 gen small CCA. By the time their small CCAs are operational, Type A and Type B would have successors.

Overtaking point has happened a while ago but it isn't clear yet because China is still amassing equal size. But China's platforms are more modern now. Even in the air where US is keen to maintain their usual gap. They've failed already. Only possible gap is submarines and even there China's caught up in base tech. US hasn't moved forward much in the last 20 years to be honest whereas China's been absolutely exponential.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've written but I think you've really brought in a bunch of topics into this post beyond the scale of the thread itself.

Talking about large strokes of application of technology and overall military balance is a bit behind the scope of this thread.

I'm wondering if what we're looking at is actually the "H"(i.e. GJ)-20??

No reason to suspect that imo, unless there is a lot of noise from the grapevine suggesting it.

Also, wondering what you've written implies that a large stealthy strike UCAV and H-20 may not both simultaneously be pursued.

 

[ougoah]

It feels like with China's innovation, production and development cycle rates, it is aiming to amass a manned airforce that can match (and then exceed once 5th gen numbers equal and 6th gen becomes operational) the USAF while simultaneously amassing an unmanned airforce that can perform the exact same role (just differently) as the manned airforce. Either one aims to completely match and then exceed the entire USAF and airborne USN. The manned pillar is obviously far more ahead in buildup but the unmanned pillar would have unimaginable manufacturing pace and iteration due to dropping the human component.

Give it 10 to 15 years and unmanned PLAAF + PLANAF is going to be the world's second most capable "airforce" after the manned PLAAF + PLANAF.

People have no idea how fast China is moving (sorry has been moving for the last 20 years) while giving the US way too much credit for the sloppy work they've done over the last 20 years. Every effort and resource they had basically went into F-35 as the only major mainstream platform that showed up in numbers.

 

[Blitzo]

It feels like with China's innovation, production and development cycle rates, it is aiming to amass a manned airforce that can match (and then exceed once 5th gen numbers equal and 6th gen becomes operational) the USAF while simultaneously amassing an unmanned airforce that can perform the exact same role (just differently) as the manned airforce. Either one aims to completely match and then exceed the entire USAF and airborne USN. The manned pillar is obviously far more ahead in buildup but the unmanned pillar would have unimaginable manufacturing pace and iteration due to dropping the human component.

Give it 10 to 15 years and unmanned PLAAF + PLANAF is going to be the world's second most capable "airforce" after the manned PLAAF + PLANAF.

People have no idea how fast China is moving (sorry has been moving for the last 20 years) while giving the US way too much credit for the sloppy work they've done over the last 20 years. Every effort and resource they had basically went into F-35 as the only major mainstream platform that showed up in numbers.

This post is unnecessarily too broad and off topic, please dial it back a bit.

I'm sure I don't need to explain how what you've written may be an opportunity for multiple pages of off topic discussion.

 

[ougoah]

I'm wondering if what we're looking at is actually the "H"(i.e. GJ)-20??

Either of those large wingspans cannot possibly be H-20 since H-20 is supposed to be strategic ranged, heavy bomber. Neither of those aircraft are strategic range looking, long range yes and allows them to possibly operate around the 2nd island chain and back but not fly to the US and back. Neither of them look like they have the length of weapons bays that would be required for a real strategic heavy bomber. The H-20 would be at least 2x as volumous with possibly similar wingspan but certainly much longer than both of these.

If either of these are manned, well what would be the point other than being a H-6 replacement but you want to hold missiles that are longer so these are only good for stealth strike at extreme ranges where most UAVs cannot reach e.g. GJ-11 extended range. Drop bombs and smaller guided munitions but nothing like a ALBM or even YJ-15 or YJ-17 sized.

 

[Maikeru]

GJ-11/21 are almost definitely not medium altitude.
Medium altitude tends to be the domain of propeller UAVs.

GJ-11/21 should be high altitude, long endurance stealthy strike UAVs, but with lower payload and lower range than GJ-X and WZ-X.




I don't necessarily disagree with what you've written but I think you've really brought in a bunch of topics into this post beyond the scale of the thread itself.

Talking about large strokes of application of technology and overall military balance is a bit behind the scope of this thread.



No reason to suspect that imo, unless there is a lot of noise from the grapevine suggesting it.

Also, wondering what you've written implies that a large stealthy strike UCAV and H-20 may not both simultaneously be pursued.

As I recall, we've had rumours that H20 was either cancelled or delayed for "re-imagining", I'm speculating that maybe PLAAF decided to go for an unmanned H-20 in the end, and this might be it. I'm not sure at this stage what advantages a crewed H-20 would have to justify the extra costs. Of course I have no special insight so this is just my speculation, but GJ-X does have a volume similar or greater than B-21 it seems, and is somewhat longer.

So probably the manned H-20 will turn up next month...