Maybe the PLAAF assesses that there are large areas of the Western Pacific that are safe to loiter in, especially for a VLO asset?
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Given that both the B-1 and B-2 has seen 'combat' in Afghanistan against local goat herders and poppy farmers turned mujahideen, it's not unreasonable for the PLAAF to pursue a single heavy bomber platform for both non-permissive and permissive environments.
A singular platform for such missions makes even more sense once you consider not only the H-6's range and age, but also the fact that its production line is reportedly no longer in existence.
The H-20 could also be used to make up munitions numbers or just do low-threat bombing runs against entrenched enemy positions in the first island chain. Kind of act like the arsenal drones could, carrying long-ranged AAMs or CMs and HCMs to hold planes and ships at threat from the second or third aerial line.
The H-6's production line is rumored to have shut own!?
That is what I was advised, hence reportedly.
I know Huitong's CMA tracks H-6J/K/Ns individually with photos and serial numbers, but no idea if his datasets are exhaustive.
Maybe someone with better views of Xian can tell us if many or any H-6s emerged on the tarmac last year?
There's a lot of focus on far distances like Guam and Australia, but China still has air supremacy over huge regions of land where the ground will be hostile. Consider Korean peninsula, Philippines, Indochina, closer parts of Japan etc.
China still needs a way to digest those areas, not just have air supremacy and that's it. People don't give that important consideration as much respect as it needs imho, instead people just focus on that we need longer and longer ranges.
But another aspect I see is that H-20 as a 6th gen family won't just only carry bombs, it might have some awacs and EW function, in which case its good that it can loiter around in the back after dropping it's munitions.
Good question and all.
So the US in the early 2000s started defining what the next gen bomber gonna be like and did alot of studies to choose the right requirements. Initially, the logical choice would be stealthy extended supercuising bomber that spends the least amount of time in contested airspace to complete its mission. What they found eventually was that an ultra stealthy stand-in bomber (staying extended time within contested airspace) that can immediately respond to pop up threats is more effective than a high speed bomber that has to be launched and rushed toward the target that may have already completed its mission and disappeared.
This means that this bomber has to be ultra stealthy against wide spectrum of detections (low frequency radars and infrared sensors) and long loitering time. This means subsonic long leading edge flying wing.
You may also ask why the ability to respond immediately to pop up threat is important - because that's where warfare is heading. The russian ukrainian war only reinforces this. From SAM systems to artillery, the driving requirements are mobility and less stationary times in order to hide from enemy's counterstrikes.
So you may ask how feasible is it for a bomber to lingering around after it has opened its bomb bay or launched a missile and immediately get picked up from dozens of advanced MLD's in the air. Well, the answer is not that if it is feasible but that it has no choice but to be feasible. That's the challenge to overcome for engineers in both the B-21 and the H-20 programs because to be effective, you need to fullfill this particular capability.
by78
General
by78
General
This is an English language forum. Please provide a translation or summary. Who is this guy? What is he saying?
What is his track record? Is he trustworthy? Is he an insider? Or is he yet another one of the thousands of 傻逼 running his mouth on camera? If so, why should this particular 傻逼 deserve our attention?