H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)

A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
Such an aircraft would make sense given the vast distances in the Pacific. But thus far we have no evidence of something like this being in actual development. Plus how do they have an engine in that category. The Russian production of NK-32-02 engines thus far is quite limited and their total annual engine production is known. Not enough to produce for their own needs in Russia let alone for export. And Chinese engines are still not developed enough. Perhaps in 5 years or nearer the end of the decade. But right now I can't see it happening.
Click to expand...
Engine is a big element for sure. Not sure if it would be valuable to base a new bomber on old engines but at least they would be known quantity and reliable.

If it's in the range of 50- 60 tons, , they could go with D30-F6 or making an afterburning version of WS-18. It would not be a pretty solution but would still be functionnal.
 
O

OppositeDay

Senior Member
Registered Member
Shilao in his latest podcast rated the rumor of a stealth Tu-22M3M class bomber project in earnest development as highly unlikely because

1. Not enough engineering and production capacity. The sources of the rumor point to a Shenyang project but they have their hands full with J16 and J35.

2. No good engine options.

3. What are they going to replace? Who will fly them? PLA's current procurement philosophy is to replace retiring equipments with new. This rumored project is neither a replacement for JH-7 nor H-6.

4. Nice to have but not crucial. So low priority.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
What about Xian? They probably have some engineering staff available. And should have more once H-20 is finished.
It would not be their first supersonic aircraft either since they made the JH-7.
Also I expect ARJ-21 production to shift towards COMAC at Pudong long term. This will become necessary to avoid US sanctions on Xian.
China could make a quad engine supersonic bomber using WS-10 engines if they wanted to.
That would have similar engine power as Tu-22M3.
 
A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
What about Xian? They probably have some engineering staff available. And should have more once H-20 is finished.
It would not be their first supersonic aircraft either since they made the JH-7.
Also I expect ARJ-21 production to shift towards COMAC at Pudong long term. This will become necessary to avoid US sanctions on Xian.
China could make a quad engine supersonic bomber using WS-10 engines if they wanted to.
That would have similar engine power as Tu-22M3.
Click to expand...
I would see a replacement of JH-7 with a f-111 size bomber. WS18 with afterburner like the D30 on the Mig31 would be enough and available for a supersonic JH-XX. Tu-22 are way bigger and a bomber of that size don't fill a replacement need.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
OppositeDay said:
Shilao in his latest podcast rated the rumor of a stealth Tu-22M3M class bomber project in earnest development as highly unlikely because

1. Not enough engineering and production capacity. The sources of the rumor point to a Shenyang project but they have their hands full with J16 and J35.

2. No good engine options.

3. What are they going to replace? Who will fly them? PLA's current procurement philosophy is to replace retiring equipments with new. This rumored project is neither a replacement for JH-7 nor H-6.

4. Nice to have but not crucial. So low priority.
Click to expand...
I think the image shows smaller, cheaper tactical striker, like a stealthy, larger JH-7, Su-34 or F-111. This is what I proposed a few months back as a possible alternative.

Basically, something roughly fighter+ sized, capable of tactical strike payloads (~8000-10000 kg payload) with internally carried cruise missiles, with minimum 1500 km combat radius. I'd estimate the size to be 25-27m, 15-17m wingspan.

For reference:

Su-34 is 23m long, 14.7m wingspan, 1100 km range, 8000 kg payload.
Tu-22M is 42m long, 23m minimum wingspan, 5000 km range, 24000 kg payload.
B-1B is 45m long, 24m minimum wingspan, 9000 km range, 23000 kg payload.
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
J-16 already has more payload than JH-7 and similar payload to a Su-34.
You could make an argument for a stealth version of that. But you would likely be better off using the J-20 as a baseline for this.
Think of this like the proposals that were available at one point for fighter bomber variants of the F-22.

A J-20 bomber variant or J-16 would have half or a third the payload of a Tu-22M3 or B-1. Which is why I said a supersonic bomber would need to be a quad jet.

A quad jet supersonic bomber would have its uses.

The Tu-22M3 can be used as a carrier for Kinzhal with four Kinzhals while the MiG-31 can only carry one.
This would vastly expand the engagement envelope for Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles and reduce response time and possibility of interception.
With 3000 km range the Kinzhal vastly outranges any ship borne US fighter component.

Using a subsonic bomber as a launch platform would degrade the performance of the launched ballistic missile.
 
Last edited:
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
J-16 already has more payload than JH-7 and similar payload to a Su-34.
You could make an argument for a stealth version of that. But you would likely be better off using the J-20 as a baseline for this.
Think of this like the proposals that were available at one point for fighter bomber variants of the F-22.

A J-20 bomber variant or J-16 would have half or a third the payload of a Tu-22M3 or B-1. Which is why I said a supersonic bomber would need to be a quad jet.

A quad jet supersonic bomber would have its uses.

The Tu-22M3 can be used as a carrier for Kinzhal with four Kinzhals while the MiG-31 can only carry one.
This would vastly expand the engagement envelope for Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles and reduce response time and possibility of interception.
With 3000 km range the Kinzhal vastly outranges any ship borne US fighter component.

Using a subsonic bomber as a launch platform would degrade the performance of the launched ballistic missile.
Click to expand...
So a JH-20 basically, with dual seating, lengthened fuselage and modified weapons bays (possibly a single large one?) to accommodate strike sized weapons?
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The H-20 should be pretty long ranged once it comes out. A subsonic flying wing is likely the longest range design right now.
B-2 supposedly has 11,000 km range. I doubt the H-20 would have less range.
That is basically intercontinental range. On a polar route from Northern China you should be able to hit targets all over the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top