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

FriedButter

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Flight test for aircraft with "strategic and historic significance" could be H-20.

Just gonna repost this sentence from the other thread.

China is planning to conduct a flight test for an important type of aircraft that has crucial strategic and historic significance

The word “crucial” strategic is an interesting word to choose.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Same news in Chinese, with photos from the ceremony.

葛和平书记对某型号研制进行了动员,向全体参试人员发出动员令,强调了该型号研制的重大战略意义、历史意义,要求该型号研制党员干部和职工要始终站在政治高度,充分认识坚决完成型号任务的极端重要性。要弘扬航空报国精神,传承信仰之志;发扬拼搏奋斗精神,展现奋斗之志;坚持严谨求实创新,砥砺跨越之路。
As you can see in the comments, most Chinese people reading this news would be thinking about H-20 too. Th second highlighted bit reads "to fully understand the extreme importance of steadfast completion (of test flight) of a certain type".
 
Last edited:

Squidward

New Member
Registered Member
The word “crucial” strategic is an interesting word to choose.
It really is. While a VLO flying wing bomber would definitely offer the PLAAF new capabilites, none come to mind as "crucial" to the PLA's strategy. You've already got the rocket force for far away targets like military bases or CSGs, and you've already got credible nuclear deterrence with subs and land-based ICBMs. Unless by "crucial" the article means "the ability to do what you've already been able to, but for slightly cheaper", it's possible that the H-20 isn't merely a Chinese B-2. Maybe, just maybe, it could be something much more?

What kind of capability could that PLAAF want that proves "crucial" to the PLA's overall strategy?
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
It really is. While a VLO flying wing bomber would definitely offer the PLAAF new capabilites, none come to mind as "crucial" to the PLA's strategy. You've already got the rocket force for far away targets like military bases or CSGs, and you've already got credible nuclear deterrence with subs and land-based ICBMs. Unless by "crucial" the article means "the ability to do what you've already been able to, but for slightly cheaper", it's possible that the H-20 isn't merely a Chinese B-2. Maybe, just maybe, it could be something much more?
Er. A large stealthy bomber that can penetrate air defenses is a pretty crucial strategic capability.
 

Squidward

New Member
Registered Member
Er. A large stealthy bomber that can penetrate air defenses is a pretty crucial strategic capability.
If you put it like that, yeah, you have a point. Maybe I was overreacting to the word "crucial". But since the PLARF exists, what reason is there for sending in a stealth bomber to take out certain targets vs. some ballistic missiles, apart from it being cheaper? Perhaps a smaller chance of strategic miscalculation for the enemy?
 

OppositeDay

Senior Member
Registered Member
It really is. While a VLO flying wing bomber would definitely offer the PLAAF new capabilites, none come to mind as "crucial" to the PLA's strategy. You've already got the rocket force for far away targets like military bases or CSGs, and you've already got credible nuclear deterrence with subs and land-based ICBMs. Unless by "crucial" the article means "the ability to do what you've already been able to, but for slightly cheaper", it's possible that the H-20 isn't merely a Chinese B-2. Maybe, just maybe, it could be something much more?

What kind of capability could that PLAAF want that proves "crucial" to the PLA's overall strategy?

There's no point in semantic analysis on Global Times English articles. Their writers are usually rather careless with their English. In this case, the original Chinese is better translated as "major" rather than "crucial".
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
If you put it like that, yeah, you have a point. Maybe I was overreacting to the word "crucial". But since the PLARF exists, what reason is there for sending in a stealth bomber to take out certain targets vs. some ballistic missiles, apart from it being cheaper? Perhaps a smaller chance of strategic miscalculation for the enemy?
Response time and attack profiles are very big variables. Ballistic missiles have long kill chains that increase exposure to countermeasure and require a host of support assets. They are also easier to shoot down because they are immediately noticed when they are launched. You also can't do kill confirmation as easily with a ballistic missiles strike. A deep penetration stealth bomber allows you to do real time point of attack surveillance, which is pretty important for guaranteeing kills for sensitive or essential targets. You're also going to be able to deliver a greater volume of munitions onto a target with a deep penetration stealth bomber than with a battery of ballistic missiles.
 
Top