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

A new large drone would be better at dropping MOAB’s and lots of SDB’s in a Taiwan scenario, no need to risk lives or H20’s.

They may want to keep H20 just for the strategic missions, though I hope not.

My hope is that it becomes a platform like the Y20 or Z20, one which spawns many specialized variants.

Andy1974 said:

A new large drone would be better at dropping MOAB’s and lots of SDB’s in a Taiwan scenario, no need to risk lives or H20’s.

They may want to keep H20 just for the strategic missions, though I hope not.

My hope is that it becomes a platform like the Y20 or Z20, one which spawns many specialized variants.

Click to expand...

MOABs are just too big. Look at how a B-21 can only drop 1 of these.

And when you have something the size of a B-21, the weight required to add a crew is negligible, as per USAF statements.
Plus they plan on an unmanned B-21 version anyway.

But something like the GJ-11 or X-47B would be useful.
You get a stealthy flying wing with 1 tonne of payload and a range of 4000km in total.
That payload is enough for 8 SDBs.

The main issue of the H-20 is that it will be more expensive because quite likely it will be quad engine.
But because it is quad engine it also should have a lower profile. I am pretty sure the B-21 Raider will have to be quite careful hiding the engine blades.

Inst said:

The H-20, from the looks of it, is between 33-50% larger than the B-2 in terms of its main body, which promises a 27,000-30,000 kg payload.

The H-6, in contrast to the H-20, has about 9,000 kg in its payload. There's about 200 of them in Chinese service, so you could expect around 2 kt per day in H-6 payloads. A 100 H-20 deployment would provide a 2.7-3 kt payload per day, and what's more, the H-20, unlike the H-6, has roughly double the combat radius; i.e, it can threaten Anchorage with cruise missiles and dumb-bomb the entirety of Japan with fuel to spare, not only from Shenyang, but also from Shanghai and so on.

===

Then there's fact that I never said that the Chinese would be able to achieve air supremacy. Let's look at the NGAD platform; it's rumored to be XLO (-70 dBsm), the Americans have their own equivalent of interceptor missiles in roughly a AIM-120 form factor with 300-400 km range.

The Chinese can use heavy counterstealth radars (i.e, absolutely huge honking arrays working in extreme low band) to provide an exclusion zone above Taiwan, perhaps, but the H-6 is likely between 25 to 100 m^2 RCS. The NGAD will be able to spot it from likely outside the exclusion zone, fire their missiles, then the H-6 gets killed without any meaningful retaliation.

The H-20, on the other hand, is effectively invisible; a -30 dBsm, to present radar technologies, reduces detection range from 400 km to 71 km, or 800 km to 140 km, hopefully putting stealth interceptors into conflict with escort fighters. A full -40 dBsm would reduce ranges to 40 km and 80 km, making it extremely resistant to intercept attempts by NGAD and other 6th generation fighters.

Click to expand...

Oh please! NOT this BS again … we have NO information on the H-20‘s size and dimensions and you take again an unofficial artwork made by some fans for granted to deduct size, capabilities and performances?! Really?

IMO we should stop these what if speculations until we get a first image of the real one or some sort of official data.

@Blitzo ?

Thread back open after cleanup.

I don't know what is allowed in this thread

If

"we have NO information on the H-20‘s size and dimensions"

and

"stop these what if speculations until we get a first image of the real one or some sort of official data"

I suggest at this point that it would be simpler to make a list of those who can post in this thread.

W20 said:

I don't know what is allowed in this thread

If

"we have NO information on the H-20‘s size and dimensions"

and

"stop these what if speculations until we get a first image of the real one or some sort of official data"

I suggest at this point that it would be simpler to make a list of those who can post in this thread.

Click to expand...

I think it was more along the lines of specifying any specific stats (we don't know any at all) that was the main issue here. Yes, it is all speculation, but plainly stating that H-20 is this large, this fast rather than leading with a "I think/Potentially" may mislead others on what the latest developments are. Discussing the role this bomber could occupy in the PLAAF seems, fine?

tankphobia said:

I think it was more along the lines of specifying any specific stats (we don't know any at all) that was the main issue here. Yes, it is all speculation, but plainly stating that H-20 is this large, this fast rather than leading with a "I think/Potentially" may mislead others on what the latest developments are. Discussing the role this bomber could occupy in the PLAAF seems, fine?

Click to expand...

W20 said:

I don't know what is allowed in this thread

If

"we have NO information on the H-20‘s size and dimensions"

and

"stop these what if speculations until we get a first image of the real one or some sort of official data"

I suggest at this point that it would be simpler to make a list of those who can post in this thread.

Click to expand...

The problem is that one certain member since years is not only speculating, but making conclusions based on totally unjustified assumptions and later tells everybody, these would be final conclusions, which were commonly accepted. These include not only such general points like overall configuration and since, but he made conclusions already on performance, role and „the B-2 is a failure“ and stated them as facts.

And if you know on what fan-made drawings and that strange model he all did this, this forum and this flag.ship it is simply the wrong place for such BS. Even more - and that was the final nail on his coffin - he started another provocative thread only for trolling!

A few years back people seemed genuinely uncertain whether H-20 would be powered by WS-10 or WS-18, but judging from recent posts WS-10 has since become the expectation. Was this change a result of news/rumors, or was it because of the increased production rate of WS-10 equipped J-20?

Russia is going with a NK-32 derivative for PAK DA instead of the 117S->Izdeliye-30 path. That likely means a twin-engine aircraft. B21 is expected to have twin F135s. Without counting in H-20, B2 will soon become the exception among flying wing bombers for its quad engine configuration.

D30KP2 is an early 1970s Soviet low pressure engine, old tech compared to F135 or even NK-32, but AECC have been working on WS-18 for a while now. It took PW 6 years (1979 - 1985) to get from JT8D-209 to JT8D-219, increasing pressure ratio and thrust by 11% without touching the basic design. WS-20's fan blades have been estimated to be at a tech level similar to early-mid 1990s CFM56 variants. If an improved variant of WS-18 is at a similar tech level as WS-20 re material and blade design, we can expect substantial improvement in thrust, going from early 1970s Soviet level tech to early-mid 1990s Western level tech.

Y-20's chef designer said at last year's Zhuhai Airshow that two domestic engines were being tested on Y-20, one of them was almost certainly WS-18 . A WS-18 variant with substantially increased thrust could serve as as H-20's test/backup engine before a WS-10 derived design becomes ready. If a WS-10 derived D30KP2 sized engine began development at the same time as H-20, the new engine could be ready before H-20's serial production given the experiences gained from WS-10 and WS-20. A second higher bypass WS-10 derivative should be a much easier project for China than China's first original flying wing, stealth, strategic, bomber (four separate firsts if we don't count JH-7 as a pure bomber).

This is not claiming H-20 will definitely feature a twin engine design. I'm just suggesting engine availability should not be a deal breaker for a twin engine H-20.