Discussion continued here to avoid derailing original thread, since the discussion will be more about what comes after the H-6 than the H-6 itself.
With a length of ~12 meters, Adorable Dolphin estimated that the JL-1 should weigh no more than 12 tons (which is the practical payload capacity limit of the H-6N). Let's put that at 10-11 tons. And with a 1-ton warhead, which means that the rest of missile weight (which primarily made up of fuel and rocket engines) would weight about 9-10 tons.
With the same 1-ton warhead model, they could have two smaller missiles that carry one such warhead each. Sure, their ranges would be slashed by a lot (let's say by half) compared to the JL-1, and even if their combined weights would be slightly higher than the JL-1 by 2-4 tons - But one bomber could carry more than one 1-ton warhead per sortie per aircraft, with 50% increased chances of penetrating the enemy's Integrated-Air-&-Missile-Defense (IAMD) systems.
In this case - The role of a large, VLO strategic bomber would be to bring those smaller missiles closer to the enemy targets (whether those targets are on the 3IC or CONUS) by acting as their reusable first stages (whereas the JL-1 has two non-reusable stages) before launching them at standoff distances. Having sufficient VLO and ECM capabilities built-in such bombers would enable them to get way closer to the enemy with greater survival chances than the H-6N could ever dreamt of.
This advantage applies to both conventional and nuclear warheads.
(For reference, the Pershing 2 land-based MRBM with a length of ~10.6 meters weighs about 7.5 tons with a ~270 kilogram warhead.)
Besides, as I recall - Both the Guancha Gang and Adorable Dolphin have indicated on multiple occasions that the H-20 will have its own missiles, and that the ability to carry missiles in the category of the JL-1 may not be the H-20 primary goal. I won't say that those missiles would be tailor-made for the H-20 - But as I would understand it, in the view of the PLAAF and PLA CMC, those missiles would have the highest efficacy and effectiveness with the H-20 serving as their launch platform.
Moreover, as for comparing with the H-6K/J/N and the GJ-X in terms of anti-ship and land-attack strike missions up to and around the 2IC - If the H-6K/J/N could carry 2x YJ-XXs per sortie per aircraft for a Guam strike mission, and that the GJ-X could carry 4x of the same missiles per sortie per aircraft for the same mission - Then having the H-20 carry 6x or even 8x of the same missiles for the same mission would very much be a viable path forward.
With a length of ~12 meters, Adorable Dolphin estimated that the JL-1 should weigh no more than 12 tons (which is the practical payload capacity limit of the H-6N). Let's put that at 10-11 tons. And with a 1-ton warhead, which means that the rest of missile weight (which primarily made up of fuel and rocket engines) would weight about 9-10 tons.
With the same 1-ton warhead model, they could have two smaller missiles that carry one such warhead each. Sure, their ranges would be slashed by a lot (let's say by half) compared to the JL-1, and even if their combined weights would be slightly higher than the JL-1 by 2-4 tons - But one bomber could carry more than one 1-ton warhead per sortie per aircraft, with 50% increased chances of penetrating the enemy's Integrated-Air-&-Missile-Defense (IAMD) systems.
In this case - The role of a large, VLO strategic bomber would be to bring those smaller missiles closer to the enemy targets (whether those targets are on the 3IC or CONUS) by acting as their reusable first stages (whereas the JL-1 has two non-reusable stages) before launching them at standoff distances. Having sufficient VLO and ECM capabilities built-in such bombers would enable them to get way closer to the enemy with greater survival chances than the H-6N could ever dreamt of.
This advantage applies to both conventional and nuclear warheads.
(For reference, the Pershing 2 land-based MRBM with a length of ~10.6 meters weighs about 7.5 tons with a ~270 kilogram warhead.)
Besides, as I recall - Both the Guancha Gang and Adorable Dolphin have indicated on multiple occasions that the H-20 will have its own missiles, and that the ability to carry missiles in the category of the JL-1 may not be the H-20 primary goal. I won't say that those missiles would be tailor-made for the H-20 - But as I would understand it, in the view of the PLAAF and PLA CMC, those missiles would have the highest efficacy and effectiveness with the H-20 serving as their launch platform.
Moreover, as for comparing with the H-6K/J/N and the GJ-X in terms of anti-ship and land-attack strike missions up to and around the 2IC - If the H-6K/J/N could carry 2x YJ-XXs per sortie per aircraft for a Guam strike mission, and that the GJ-X could carry 4x of the same missiles per sortie per aircraft for the same mission - Then having the H-20 carry 6x or even 8x of the same missiles for the same mission would very much be a viable path forward.
Last edited:
