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

B

BillRamengod

New Member
Registered Member
sdkan said:
【当列强的感觉还不错的-哔哩哔哩】
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
“The H-20 has made its maiden flight, and don't worry about how I found out.”
“I took the risk of being summoned for a talk just to give you a little heads-up.”

I don`t know how many trust we should put to this guy.Sounds too skechy.
 
Last edited:
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
ACuriousPLAFan said:
Moreover, has it ever occurred to the proposers that "the H-20 should be some kind of hypersonic sub-orbital strike spacecraft" that the H-20 shouldn't only be used for strategic strikes against wartime industries and critical military infrastructures & facilities on CONUS, but also tactical strikes against enemy military bases & installations and naval fleets that are closer to home?

The costs involved to reliably procure, operate and maintain for a hypersonic strategic strike platform definitely aren't going to be cheap, no matter how advanced China's warfighting industries are, and no matter how much the economies of scale tilts in China's favor. Sooner or later, the consuming of the war chest are gonna stack up.

During a peer-to-peer conflict, the H-20s won't be sitting inside their reinforced hangars and wait for a decisive moment or even doomsday. They're very much going to join in the fight against the enemy forces, sooner or latter. In fact, Chinese military doctrine explicitly forbids viewing any of its conventional weapon systems and platforms as to be used only during "decisive battles" (决战兵器), and all those weapon systems and platforms are to be viewed as attritable, if not expendable, in China's overall war effort.

That means the H-20 shouldn't be viewed as indispensable. Pilling up hypersonic capabilities et cetera, and

Sure, a subsonic (or even a supersonic), 4-engined H-20 will overlap with the J-36 in certain domains, but consider this - If the J-36 can carry 2x YJ-2X HGV missiles with 2000 kilometers of range, the H-20 can:
1. Carry 4x, 6x if not even 8x of the same YJ-2X missiles; and/or
2. Carry 2x or 4x much longer/larger HGV missiles with 3000-4000 kilometers of strike range; and
3. Fly much further than the J-36 -
Simply thanks to its larger internal volume (hence larger IWBs and fuel tanks) and a more efficient (simple/cranked beak flying wing) design.

These advantages cannot be described as simply 1+1=2, but more like 1+1>2.
Click to expand...

You can’t get the loitering time for something like B-2 or B-21 with a supersonic bird, let alone a hypersonic one. They occupy different niches. Saying that MD-21 is H-20 is just cope.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
You can’t get the loitering time for something like B-2 or B-21 with a supersonic bird, let alone a hypersonic one. They occupy different niches. Saying that MD-21 is H-20 is just cope.
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to what the application of high loiter time would be for a high end manned platform. Are we assuming no F-15s and F-35s get scrambled when things start blowing up?

That is a very luxurious capability to have, IMO, kind of like the US having Zumwalt for shore bombardment because naval control is just assumed. Is air control just assumed for the PLAAF? I am not that ambitious or optimistic.
 
Z

zyklon

New Member
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
I'm curious as to what the application of high loiter time would be for a high end manned platform. Are we assuming no F-15s and F-35s get scrambled when things start blowing up?

That is a very luxurious capability to have, IMO, kind of like the US having Zumwalt for shore bombardment because naval control is just assumed. Is air control just assumed for the PLAAF? I am not that ambitious or optimistic.
Click to expand...

IIRC, some of the early drawings of the H-20 depicted a bomber utilizing variable geometry wings.

I'm not an aerospace engineer, so correct me if this is off: generally speaking variable geometry wings are incorporated, despite their relative complexity and cost, to improve aircraft stability at lower speeds (like say when an aircraft might be loitering).

So if those drawings of the H-20 are accurate, then loitering ability is likely a PLAAF requirement for the H-20.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
zyklon said:
IIRC, some of the early drawings of the H-20 depicted a bomber utilizing variable geometry wings.

I'm not an aerospace engineer, so correct me if this is off: generally speaking variable geometry wings are incorporated, despite their relative complexity and cost, to improve aircraft stability at lower speeds (like say when an aircraft might be loitering).

So if those drawings of the H-20 are accurate, then loitering ability is likely a PLAAF requirement for the H-20.
Click to expand...

I'm not an aerospace engineer either, just a random guy. Thank you for showing the mechanism of loitering capability.

I'm just not really understanding the value of doing so in a very high threat environment. Is the PLAAF assuming it will have air dominance and fighters scrambled in response to a VHF radar detection or things blowing up will not be an issue? Otherwise if there's an intercept going up, wouldn't you want your strike assets to flee?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top