H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions
- Thread starter F40Racer
- Start date
Re: H-6 bomber thread
The Chinese characters painted near the nosecone reads "War God", that's some badass name right there.
The Chinese characters painted near the nosecone reads "War God", that's some badass name right there.
maozedong
Banned Idiot
Re: H-6 bomber thread
I think perhaps it is still called H-6K,but it is total new type bomber,China give it official name"War God",that means different with other H-6 bombers.
just like Song and Yuan glass submarines,they are 039 and 039A but they are total different.
also,it should translate to "Fighting god"?
The Chinese characters painted near the nosecone reads "War God", that's some badass name right there.
I think perhaps it is still called H-6K,but it is total new type bomber,China give it official name"War God",that means different with other H-6 bombers.
just like Song and Yuan glass submarines,they are 039 and 039A but they are total different.
also,it should translate to "Fighting god"?
Last edited:
Re: H-6 bomber thread
I'd have to disagree. While I too would like to see the PLAAF retire the H-6's, it is MUCH less expensive to update an old bomber like the Badger to do a job that doesn't require all that sophisticated equipment (i.e. carry LACMs or in the H-6's case refueling). It is similar to what the US air force has done with the B-52s. The exorbinant amount of money needed to develop a new and modern bomber to suit the needs of the PLAAF probably don't warrant such a costly program at this moment. Just look at the costs for the B-1 bomber or even the B-2. The PLA are more about what is most practical and needed and not about having the newest and flashiest equipment (that is the US's job)
This is not to say such a program isn't on the horizon or being planned. For all we know a new bomber could already be being built or flying now. :china:
I'd have to disagree. While I too would like to see the PLAAF retire the H-6's, it is MUCH less expensive to update an old bomber like the Badger to do a job that doesn't require all that sophisticated equipment (i.e. carry LACMs or in the H-6's case refueling). It is similar to what the US air force has done with the B-52s. The exorbinant amount of money needed to develop a new and modern bomber to suit the needs of the PLAAF probably don't warrant such a costly program at this moment. Just look at the costs for the B-1 bomber or even the B-2. The PLA are more about what is most practical and needed and not about having the newest and flashiest equipment (that is the US's job
)This is not to say such a program isn't on the horizon or being planned. For all we know a new bomber could already be being built or flying now. :china:
Re: H-6 bomber thread
The budget of a new bomber program, would be huge to finance PLAAF requirments. With their H-6 fleet, some of them aren't newly built but uses the old airframe, and replaces avionics, engines, etc..
But yes we all would want to see a new bomber. But would it benefit the PLAAF much, not so much in putting that much resources into it.
Its either new stealth bomber or convert existing H-6 airframes. My personal thoughts.
The budget of a new bomber program, would be huge to finance PLAAF requirments. With their H-6 fleet, some of them aren't newly built but uses the old airframe, and replaces avionics, engines, etc..
But yes we all would want to see a new bomber. But would it benefit the PLAAF much, not so much in putting that much resources into it.
Its either new stealth bomber or convert existing H-6 airframes. My personal thoughts.
Pointblank
Senior Member
Re: H-6 bomber thread
It probably still able to carry regular dumb bombs, or they have fitted cruise missile racks for additional missiles inside.
It probably still able to carry regular dumb bombs, or they have fitted cruise missile racks for additional missiles inside.
Re: H-6 bomber thread
Please people, the aircraft is 1950s technology and wouldn't last one miunite against an air force with radars and BVR equipped fighters as it would stand out like a barn door on the radar screens. As a cruise missile carrier it has some capablity, but so does any aircraft that size. By the way the YJ-63 is hollow as theer is no ay thiose three scrawny techs coyuld shift it on those four small tyres.
Please people, the aircraft is 1950s technology and wouldn't last one miunite against an air force with radars and BVR equipped fighters as it would stand out like a barn door on the radar screens. As a cruise missile carrier it has some capablity, but so does any aircraft that size. By the way the YJ-63 is hollow as theer is no ay thiose three scrawny techs coyuld shift it on those four small tyres.
