Like many things in China, what was true 5 yrs ago is no longer true:
These guys make everything themselves, controller, software etc.
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
These guys make everything themselves, controller, software etc.
But high end CNC machines are still dominated by Japanese and German firms?
I mean when you get to high end you start talking technical terms like workpiece size and tolerance. What's the maximum tolerance and minimum workpiece size to be high end vs low end?
Yet, USAF is retiring B-1 before B-52s. In fact, it just retired another 17 a few months ago
Supersonic bomber simply don't have the same worth that they did back 30 years ago.
You don't need supersonic bomber to launch cruise missiles from far out. The current H-6 generation of aircraft can pretty much do anything PLAAF needs in a non-stealth platform. It will be around for another 20 years at least. It's going to be China's B-52. You get more range and loiter time with H-6 than you would with a supersonic bomber. When you have clear air dominance, H-6 can drop bombs as well as any supersonic bomber.
And the B-1 got olds pretty fast. Structurally they are in worst shape than the B-52 fleet and they got way less spare parts in graveyard than b-52. Slow cruising high altitude bombers don't age fast.
Not to go, too far, off-topic, but, however long the Ukraine Conflict lasts, I think it would be great to hear, or see, some news of the H-20s developmental progress right around the time the Ukraine Conflict resolves.
The (p. 163) says China has just 300 GLCMs ._.
They keep B-52 because of their super long range (14200 km) while B-1s have far less range (9400 km) and even less combat radius (~5000 km).
Note that they are still planning to use the B-1 as a mid range tactical antiship striker with LRASM integration.
H-6K isn't that great as a tactical striker. It could get shot down long before entering range. Like the B-1, Tu-22M was designed to be a mid range tactical striker with Kh-15s.
My suggestion to the editor of the 2022/2023 edition, add numbers discretely (let's say 500 or 800 a year) until intel exposes the true number. Otherwise prepare for another nuclear missile count fiasco.
Incidentally I suspect this is what they're doing with the nuke count as well: raise it by 200 or so every yr for the next few yrs till it gets from 700 to 1500.