by78
General
I don't think you know what "amphibious" means. I have yet to see a H-6 bomber land and/or take off from water.
H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions
- Thread starter F40Racer
- Start date
I don't think you know what "amphibious" means. I have yet to see a H-6 bomber land and/or take off from water.
PiSigma
"the engineer"
It won't "land"... Will it float? Takeoff definitely not lolI don't think you know what "amphibious" means. I have yet to see a H-6 bomber land and/or take off from water.
I'm sure H-6 can 'land' on water if forced to.
As for taking off from water, you have to ask @xyqq. He seems to 'know' a lot that we don't, or maybe he makes it up as he goes along, going to great lengths to defend his theories – which he always presents as facts – and then goes silent when easily ascertained facts are revealed to him that conclusively debunk the said theories.
If you do happen to ask @xyqq, I suggest that you repeat your questions several times and phrase it differently each time because he might have considerable trouble understanding the question and will saddle you with a drawn-out 'answer' full of useless trivia that doesn't actually answer your original question. Also carefully examine his answer, because he might cite as evidence poorly photoshopped images or exclusive intel he gleaned from from movie critics and poets.
Good luck and have fun.
Please my friend, I can only beg to calm down and show much more maturity towards poster with less experience and even more with English-issues (like me)
I'm 100% for sure he never meant to say the H-6 is capable for amphibious operations but only - as he pointed out by the different pylon - that in contrast to the KD-20 launch-rail in the second image, the first H-6K has the launch-rail for the YJ-12 AShM.
As such his intention was to note something like it is aimed for a anti-naval operation.
Don't take me wrong, but I think it is a problem of the rules: On the one they say "one-liner" posts are forbidden and one has to explain a bit, but most often an image is telling enough alone by being posted, so that any comment sounds strange. On the other side he simply has a 'faible' for - as you noted - some sort of poetic description; maybe simple due to the fact, that English is not his first language (maybe he even uses an online translator?)
I think these times request/demand a lot from all of us, especially patience, and when I see how much I have to be annoyed about in my job at the moment, the best thing for me is not to get upset about certain strange phrasing in the Internet.
Therefore my suggestion would be ... If you don't like it, ignore it.
Last edited:
by78
General
I hate disagreeing with you openly, my old friend, but I have to this one time.
I think his English is fine and highly probably his native language. What he doesn't speak is common sense or basic logic. Unlike him, normal human beings intuitively and innately understand the differences between assumptions and conclusions and between inductive and deductive reasoning.
This isn't a personal attack; it's just my observation. Our mutual friend seems to have a major cognitive distortion wherein he tries very hard to make everything fit his conclusion (often arrived at through laughably flimsy inductive reasoning) despite ample evidence to the contrary. He also seems to exhibit classic symptoms of delusion of grandeur (far worse than Dunning-Kruger): he takes what he believes to be true as the objectively truth, one that must be shared by everyone else.
That's not to mention his penchant for composing loooong boring posts where he pedantically dwells on minor details that are common knowledge or obvious-as-day, as if he's lecturing at a school for the blind and mentally challenged.
I mean, some of the stuff he posts is truly hilarious, such as cramming a near-field scanning probe into an impossibly small space, presumably by using the same divine space-compression technology Noah used to fit all the animals onto his ark; thinking it's ok to mount a SATCOM antenna by pointing it toward the ground; or believing that some nonsensical combination of data-cables, delta-wings, and hardpoint alignment prevents J-10's inner wing hardpoints from being compatible with guided munitions, which is demonstrably untrue.
He content can be entertaining, but not really fit for this forum. Some of it I can and should ignore, but the more egregious instances have to be pointed out for the record so others don't take away erroneous information.
Also, there was something oddly familiar about his arrogantly pedantic behavior, then it dawned on me. When I was taking a survey course on modern East Asian literature in college, I came across a famous short story titled by the famous Chinese writer . Here's a summary provided by Wikipedia:
The narrator reminisces about the time twenty years ago when he worked as a waiter in a tavern in Luzhen (Chinese: 鲁镇), a fictional town where many of Lu Xun's stories are set. Working class men wore short coats and drank standing at the counter, whereas the richer customers who wore long gowns sat and ate inside. Kong Yiji was the only customer who wore a long gown and stood. Kong Yiji is a self-styled scholar who has failed to pass the Xiucai examination but arrogantly fills his speech with muddled classical tags, refuses to perform menial work and steals to avoid starvation. He is treated with cruelty and contempt by the other customers, one of whom gave him the nickname "Kong Yiji" based on his real surname Kong and a meaningless sequence of characters from a children's elementary text. Although Kong Yiji is a thief, he makes a point of always settling his debts with the tavern-keeper. He tries to teach the narrator orthographic trivia, but the boy rejects him; when he ingratiates himself with the town's children, they laugh at him and cadge food. Later, Kong Yiji is caught stealing and beaten until his legs break. He drags himself to the tavern and orders some wine, after which he is not seen again and presumably dies as a result of his injuries. The tavern-keeper remembers Kong Yiji's unpaid bills for a while, but he is otherwise forgotten.
Our mutual friend reminds me of Kong Yiji. He is the Kong Yiji of Sinodefence Forum!
P.S. I know, I know, I'm being a classic a-hole about our friend, but he really rubs me the wrong way.
Last edited:
I put double quotation marks around "amphibious" in the original post, Deino. The dictionary definition of Amphibious is: "relating to, living in, or suited for both land and water". Yes, H-6K demonstrated its operational capabilities "related to" and "suited for both land and water".
@by78
@xyqq
@Deino
And other members
I think this has been a meaningful enough issue that it warrants a separate thread to hash out and properly settle this problem once and for all.
Please continue the discussion here -- Using judgement and value of commentating on media (pictures, videos, articles)
@xyqq
@Deino
And other members
I think this has been a meaningful enough issue that it warrants a separate thread to hash out and properly settle this problem once and for all.
Please continue the discussion here -- Using judgement and value of commentating on media (pictures, videos, articles)
An H-6M in the same brigade with the WZ-8 carrier (Deino explained the differences between the two H-6 variants):
While it is the first time that #21112 H-6M has been spotted, a retired HD-5 shares the same serial number:
Last edited:
These are not hypersonic CJ-100 missiles (also known as DF-100). They are air launched CJ-10 cruise missiles. Not hypersonic. I don't think these land attack cruise missiles are even supersonic. CJ-10s are basically Tomahawk equivalents.
Calm down and do some research before you post such BS !!
There is no hypersonic CJ-100 in the same way the PL-10 in the J-10 thread is not very special "anti-stealth"!
It is just a regular KD-20 ALCM, nothing special.