H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Last edited:
H-20 could operate in beast mode if required, putting missiles in external pylons.
I don't think it makes sense to have a non stealth large bomber similar to b-52 for example. That's old technology no longer applicable in modern warfare.
A better solution might be to do what US is doing, have the ability use transporters as missile launchers.
So some kind of missile container that can be deployed from the back of a transporter. Then all Y-20s become bombers
Ah! Thanks ... but "both"? Isn't this the same missile?
Yes, my mistake. Post has been corrected.
Another amendment - I should've also added that it's either that missile in both photos, or some other model of huge air-launched strategic missile that only the H-6N could carry.
Either way, it its noteworthy that I've been seeing the "北京重锤" (Beijing Heavy Hammer) nickname getting called out rather frequently in the Weibo comments whenever the topic of H-6 joining the 9-3 parade is being discussed, though unsure if "北京重锤" refers to the same missile in the two photos above.
They mentioned the weakness of certain missiles like the smaller UVLS ones, they are limited in both range, onboard ECM/ECCM and payload. Hence they mentioned once they start trying to get long range HCM with all the fancy stuff like top notch ECM/ECCM and a warhead large enough to sink/disable a carrier in a single hit or even carry a nuclear payload, the missile's size quickly spirals to the point where H-6K/J/N could barely carry it with possible future missiles being entirely unable to be air launched via H-6.
Also, a 10 meter long bay is still quite a bit larger than B-2's bay, so I expect H-20 to be decently large. Atleast larger than B-2.
In that case, having 10+ meter long IWB(s) on the H-20 becomes a rather unavoidable requirement.
In turn, speaking in terms of dimension and MTOW - This should also mean that the H-20 would certainly be larger than the B-2 (~170 tons). Perhaps somewhere around the B-1B (~220 tons), though I don't think the H-20 should approach the Tu-160-category (~270 tons) for the sake of deployment flexibility, lower costs and resource consumption for manufacturing & operating, and ease of maintenance & upkeep.
Last edited:
Discussion moved here to avoid derailing original thread.
But what I'm actually intending to ask is:
How big is the target missile to be carried inside the IWBs of the H-20, relative to the Beijing Heavy Hammer carried underneath the H-6N? What about the general performance (particularly, speed and strike range) of said target missile, compared to the Beijing Heavy Hammer?
But what I'm actually intending to ask is:
How big is the target missile to be carried inside the IWBs of the H-20, relative to the Beijing Heavy Hammer carried underneath the H-6N? What about the general performance (particularly, speed and strike range) of said target missile, compared to the Beijing Heavy Hammer?
I think they implied it's of similar size or maybe larger as they said H-6 is no longer a suitable launch aircraft.
B2 have a weapon bay lenght of about 7,4 m, a flying wing type would need to be longer to accomodate a 10m+ bomb bay. A blended wing design with a longer center section would certainly help to achive it without being a lot bigger.
But still nothing solid on the design... we are swimming in speculations.