asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
And even better to see Chinese institutions publishing papers on such topics
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
ladioussupp
Junior Member
Fig. 4 shows DSI bumps are hot spots contributing RCS. Designs of J-20 and F-35 may share the same effect.
Attachments
-
未命名.png
Is the alternative better though?
ladioussupp
Junior Member
Don't know whether exists any comparable RCS analysis of F-22 or PAK-FA.
Well, we do know that the PAK-FA is going to employ radar blockers, while the F-22 had to design its inlet tunnel extensively to reduce returns (which I heard added a lot of weight). Seems like the inlet is a challenge for every RCS design.
janjak desalin
Junior Member
defencetalk.com has posted an article entitled:, read here:
Though somewhat confusing as this article cites a Kanwa article which cites the China Daily, this article states that China Daily reported that in a "...recent military meeting...", it was "... agreed that a long-range strategic bomber would enable the air force to attack farther out into the Pacific Ocean, as far as the 'second island chain'.” Additionally, China Daily is cited as reporting that "The Chinese military defines a long-range strategic bomber as one that can carry more than 10 tons of air-to-ground munitions and with a minimum range of 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles) without refueling."
Although I am not an adherent of the 'Second Island Chain" school of thought, I do understand their geo-strategic significance. Nevertheless, the two statements attributed to the Chinese military, above, to me are, incongruous. Consequently, I'll exploit that incongruity to wade into an earlier argument in this thread, the regional vs strategic bomber debate. Put simply, I'm a proponent of the regional bomber as the most relevant option. My definition of a regional bomber is a bomber with a range of 2500 statute miles This is roughly analogous to a casual definition of an intermediate range bomber. I won't rely on any literal explanations of why I believe this, but will simply post two google earth images of a 2500 mile radius superimposed upon four strategic locations in China. One point in the west and three in the east.
From these images, it is plain to see that, in the east, the Second Island Chain (read Guam) is well within the 2500 mile radius, in the southeast, all of China's strategic objectives in this region are covered, and, in the west, all of China's strategic objectives as are also well within this range.
We should consider that US strategic ranges are based on it's position distal to the geo-political/economic heartland. Shouldn't China's strategic ranges should similarly be based on its distance proximal to the heartland? For those that are proponents of the strategic bomber concept, superimpose a 5000 mile radius upon the geographic extremes of China and see how little more is gained by doing so.
Last edited:
janjak desalin
Junior Member
As an addendum to the above, I've always considered the Avro Vulcan as an excellent model for a Chinese regional bomber. It had the range and its planform is particularly suited to RCS minimizing adaptations.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Oh I love the design of that plane.
ladioussupp
Junior Member
JayBird
Junior Member
From reading the chinadaily article linked by ladioussupp and going by the time line of the B-2 Spirit program progress as comparison, it took the U.S around 15 years from initiation to first flight.
If the article is credible that China's long-range strategic bomber program was initiated by AVIC in 2008. Even with an optimistic estimation that maybe China can work a little faster with a less complicated or ambitious design and not run into any major obstacles. We might not see any pics of the JH-XX for at least another 5-6 years.
If the article is credible that China's long-range strategic bomber program was initiated by AVIC in 2008. Even with an optimistic estimation that maybe China can work a little faster with a less complicated or ambitious design and not run into any major obstacles. We might not see any pics of the JH-XX for at least another 5-6 years.