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

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The bomber is a reusable platform and the missile is not. It will always have its uses.
Because it is reusable it means it is cheaper per unit of dropped mass on target.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
If the H-20 is a "status symbol" are you trying to say the concept of a long range strategic stealth bomber is obsolete?
If yes then what is the technological successor to the bomber?
For example the jet plane is the technological successor to the airplane......or perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you're saying?

I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Brigadier
Registered Member
I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.
 

tamsen_ikard

Senior Member
Registered Member
I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.
Which again brings the question, how much bigger than the B2, does the H20 have to be, so that it has the range to get near CONUS with atleast some standoff missile payload capacity, and then return afterwards.

Cause current B2 obviously does not have that range. So, just imitating the B2 in terms of size will not be sufficient.
 

oldtowncrab

Just Hatched
Registered Member
I would say it's not the immediate priority but its role is irreplaceable. The PLAAF/PLA's primary missions depends on a capability to threaten North America with high volume, prompt conventional strikes, and that's something only the H-20 can bring.
A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.
 

charles18

Junior Member
Registered Member
I don’t think it’s obsolete, just that it is probably not top priority for PLAAF and PLA as a whole given the primary mission.
oh okay. I must of misinterpreted.
yeah I agree.
The H-20 is not a "top priority".
I think right now what the PLAAF needs most is to be able to dominate the first 2 island chains.
The H-20 while nice, is not critical to achieving this goal.
As for "future" goals, that's a different story.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
oh okay. I must of misinterpreted.
yeah I agree.
The H-20 is not a "top priority".
I think right now what the PLAAF needs most is to be able to dominate the first 2 island chains.
The H-20 while nice, is not critical to achieving this goal.
As for "future" goals, that's a different story.

Yeah, it’s a stealth strategic bomber and can hit boomer decision makers right in the G-Spot regarding safety of CONUS, but from China’s POV (at least in this reality) war against US homeland is not really in the cards.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Brigadier
Registered Member
Which again brings the question, how much bigger than the B2, does the H20 have to be, so that it has the range to get near CONUS with atleast some standoff missile payload capacity, and then return afterwards.

Cause current B2 obviously does not have that range. So, just imitating the B2 in terms of size will not be sufficient.
"How much bigger than the B-2" is not a meaningful question when we don't know basic properties of the H-20 like it's planform. Is it a flying wing? Is it a dart/diamond? Is it something entirely new?
A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.
I wouldn't frame it that way. Those capabilities to attack China would be the target of an overwhelming alpha strike when the balloon goes up. They're not long for this world. Almost immediately, the US would be reduced to long distance submarine raids and the occasional carrier sortie which the PLA's defenses are much more than sufficient to deal with.

If the US can't launch attacks on China from North America the way China can with the putative H-20, it would be at a severe deficit. The US doesn't look to be developing this capability because:
1. Its aerospace industry has atrophied to the point where this is prohibitively expensive if not outright impossible.
2. It believes its submarines are invincible.
3. It's too arrogant to believe China would dare to even develop something to attack it in this way.
Yeah, it’s a stealth strategic bomber and can hit boomer decision makers right in the G-Spot regarding safety of CONUS, but from China’s POV (at least in this reality) war against US homeland is not really in the cards.
The GJ-X is for the Island Chain missions. Think bolder for the H-20. Yes, China can hit them right in the G-spot in this reality.
 

reservior dogs

Junior Member
Registered Member
A credible CONUS strike capability is badly needed to address the strategic disparity vis a vis the US, which can currently strike the Chinese mainland without worrying about a proportional response towards it's own.
While the U.S. does have the ability t o hit the Chinese with our bombers and the Chinese do not with regard to the CONUS, this ability comes with a very big string attached. Today, we have interests in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. The moment a fleet of bombers start attacking China, we stand to lose all these areas. The asymmetry of power in the Western Pacific in favor of China constrains the hands of the U.S., making these bombers useless when it comes to attacking mainland China. I agree with others that developing the H-20 is lower in priority as the Chinese rightly focus on first and second island chains.
 
Top