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

W

weig2000

Captain
Skywatcher said:
If SAC doesn't get the J-31 contract, it could be in the same boat as Boeing, without any manned combat programs once the Flanker variants wrap up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a real possibility. J-31 is their only next-gen manned fighter program in the foreseeable future, which is increasingly less likely to be selected by either PLAAF or PLANAF. Export is a big if.

They will likely be involved as subcontractor to other companies though (CAC, XAC) in future programs, as they are rumored being in the J-20 program.
 
W

weig2000

Captain
Deino said:
Why ???
Click to expand...

Simple. There is no place for another 5th-gen fighter within PLAAF's lineup, they have J-20, J-16, J-11D, J-10B/C. J-20 and J-16 would be the focus going-forward. If there were any hope at all for a J-31 for PLANAF as their carrier-based fighter aircraft, that prospect has become dimmer by the day with more consensus of PLAN's future CATOBAR carriers needing a heavy-weight stealth fighter (aka a navalized J-20). PLAN is involved in the J-20 project, so said the rumor.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
weig2000 said:
News flash...

On Thursday, while attending the Air Force's Open House Day in Changchun, Jilin, General Ma Xiaotian, PLAAF Commander-in-Chief, told the press that China is developing its next-gen long-distance bomber. "You will see it in the future," said General Ma.

Here is the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Click to expand...

Did he mention when? He Weirong claimed that the J-20 would be ready in 2017, and it appears that he's right.
 
SinoSoldier

SinoSoldier

Colonel
Another view of the potential schematics of this bomber:
2016-09-02-La-Chine-confirme-le-développement-du-bombardier-lourd-07.jpg

Reports seem to imply that the design phase has been completed by late 2015, and that the project is now undergoing digital modeling and/or industrial production. SAC might also be involved in the R&D of the bomber due to their experience with flying wing UAVs.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
newguy02 said:
Does that mean XAC is developing two bombers simultaneously?

That would be a bit surprising, since XAC already had/has a lot on its hands, Y-20 and variants (Tanker, AWACS), H-20, and now potentially the H-18.

And if it is true, SAC will basically be only developing the Flanker variants and almost nothing else.

Albeit to be fair, XAC does have more experience developing medium-large aircraft with the H-6's and recently Y-20.
Click to expand...

The key "misconception" is the "now". No, all these projects were planned long time ago. You don't just do it today. I believe they were in the road map 5 to 10 years ago. The idea or demand from PLAF were even decades ago. So there is no surprise to me, and the resources were planned long ago.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
now pieces of information from the past are coming together.

I remember I posted a news report about "successful development of back-mounted S-shaped air inlet" a year ago perhaps in this forum. Now we have the confirmation of the Air Commander. That report came out in 2015 but the reported development was finished in 2013.

Remember the acknowledgement of the development of a 4th gen fighter in 2009, less than two years later J-20 took to the sky?

It won't surprise me that the new bomber prototype takes off in 2017 or 2018.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
newguy02 said:
Does that mean XAC is developing two bombers simultaneously?

That would be a bit surprising, since XAC already had/has a lot on its hands, Y-20 and variants (Tanker, AWACS), H-20, and now potentially the H-18.

And if it is true, SAC will basically be only developing the Flanker variants and almost nothing else.

Albeit to be fair, XAC does have more experience developing medium-large aircraft with the H-6's and recently Y-20.
Click to expand...
Do you have some new information to support two bomber development? I thought the latest consensus is there is only one actively ongoing out of two initial intended.

Regarding SAC not having "jobs". That is sad but, if it can not deliver, better let it "die" than keep it alive. SAC was the 1st and the backbone, XAC and CAC were all founded by taking out personells from SAC in their early times. In essence XAC and CAC are like the sons of SAC. But the purpose of having any company is to deliver something valuable. Maybe a deep restructuring is necessary to revive SAC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top