I understand there had been numerous code names for a future Chinese bomber project or projects, but that was back when we didn't know the extent of China ambition. We didn't know if China had wanted a strategic or theater bomber, or both, or if a supersonic airframe or subsonic, and so on. All we knew was that China needed and was working on a new bomber, so any vague placeholder name would do.
But then was then, and now is now.
-snip-
Therefore, JH-XX as a general placeholder can no longer do, unless we gives it a greater degree of specificity, namely JH-XX is a future fighter-bomber.
Now, from Fzgfzy, we have the following photograph:
A stingray and a platypus. But fzgfzy doesn't say if they represent separate general projects or specific airframes, or if they are active or cancelled, or if they are airframes competing for the same project, or if they are each winner of a separate project, or whether they represent strategic or theater bombers or in the case of the platypus, a fighter-bomber, so on and on. There are dozens of possible combinations.
To infer from fzgfzy's posts, as seen
,
,
,
,
, and
, that a designation as specific as 'JH' can be assigned to
two yet-to-be-unveiled bomber designs is simply, in my opinon, appalling, especially considering the rumors have been moving away from a fighter-bomber type for sometime.
Funnily enough, if we are to take
at face value, then the Platypus is a modified Flanker and therefore likely a fighter-bomber after all. But that still doesn't allow the assertion made by Sinosoldier that fzgfzy thinks there are
two JH-XX designs.
I understand how you have interpreted it that way, however I will offer an alternative.
First of all, the H-20. This is of course the strategic sized flying wing stealth bomber that we have all expected for a long time. Before it was settled on H-20 a few years ago, it was called various things -- H-X, H-8, H-9 etc. When fzgfzy posted that picture of the manta ray, the manta ray was reasonably assumed to be referring to H-20; a flying wing.
Then, there was also the strategic sized supersonic non-stealthy concept that was supposedly offered as a competitor to the flying wing that became H-20. We've never had any pictures of this concept nor has any designation ever been applied to it.
Now, we come to the issue that's caused the disagreement over the last few pages -- the stealthy, supersonic
medium bomber/fighter bomber.
The reason why I call it a "bomber/fighter bomber" is because we don't really know if this aircraft is intended to merely be a bomber or also have some level of air to air capability.
That is why it has been called various designations over the years -- JH-XX, H-18, H-X, JH-X, H-1X etc. It really is all over the place. But these designations are all referring to the same aircraft role -- a stealthy, supersonic, medium bomber/fighter bomber.
When fzgfzy posted a picture of a platypus, it was interpreted as referring to the stealthy supersonic medium bomber/fighter bomber. With the recent pictures of the SAC nose mock up, those were also interpreted to be related to the same aircraft.
With fzgfzy recently mentioning the aircraft as H-1X and going to the northwest, and being more beautiful and more sci-fi than the SAC nose mock up, those were also all interpreted to refer to the same stealthy supersonic medium bomber/fighter bomber role.
I too would like to see a greater degree of specificity for this aircraft, but it's hard to demand that when we don't know the status of this project.
So I think it is easiest at this stage just to accept that:
1: we have no idea what the designation of this stealthy supersonic medium bomber/fighter bomber is
2: there are multiple designations that have used to refer to this aircraft in the past and we should remain vigilant to clarify which aircraft they are talking about when using this role
Finally, as for Sinosoldier saying there are "two JH-XX" designs -- again, first I believe when he says JH-XX he is of course referring to the medium stealthy supersonic bomber/fighter bomber aka H-18, H-X, JH-X, platypus.
When he says there are "two" designs, he is saying that there
were two designs -- one that was worked on by SAC earlier and rejected by the PLA, and a successor/different "more beautiful" and "more sci fi" one that has supposedly been resurrected and being worked on by XAC.
There were and probably still are or will be three possible bomber projects, whether they are being pursued singly or concurrently, or if some have been abandoned, with each comes with a range of possible features, and each possibly with competing designs from different AVIC subsidiaries:
1) Strategic bomber project: definitely long-range, possibly stealthy, subsonic or supersonic, pure bomber.
2) Theater bomber project: definitely medium-range, possibly stealthy, subsonic or supersonic, pure bomber.
3) Fighter-bomber project: definitely medium-range, possibly stealthy, supersonic, not a pure bomber.
Based on the rumors on this forum:
For 1), project status is active; a flying-wing, subsonic, and stealthy airframe has been confirmed out of XAC. There might be other competing airframes we don't yet know of.
For 2), project status is unknown; but according to Huitong,
was once part of the project.
For 3), project status is unknown but leaning toward dormant. If being pursued, it will probably be along the lines of an enlarged J-20 or a modified Flanker.
I'll offer an alternative
1) Strategic bomber project: definitely long range, definitely stealthy, definitely flying wing -- basically it's H-20 from XAC that the PLAAF are committed to
2) theater/medium stealthy supersonic bomber/fighter bomber project: project status unknown, PLA commitment unknown. Has been referred to as JH-XX, H-18, JH-X, H-X, H-1X and "platypus" over the years and recently. May have first been worked on by SAC (where the recent nose mock up pictures at SAC are partially representative of) and supposedly rejected by PLA, but now supposedly resurrected in some form at XAC.
3) fighter bomber project: does not exist, has been misinterpreted as a separate project from 2) when they are actually one and the same.
The theatre/medium stealthy supersonic bomber/fighter bomber and our current vague understanding of its role, as well as the many different designations that have been used for it due to lack of a single agreed upon designation, I think is the primary root of this issue and is causing different people to interpret new rumours in different ways.
image.png
