H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

Scratch · Aug 31, 2010

Well, in the 1960s the US / UK had an ALBM program, the skybolt missile. Not really succesfull and it was cancelled in favor of SLBMs for deterrecne. But they had some succesfull launches. So the concept seems doable, once the technology is matured.
However, I do think a CSS-5 at almost 15t (?) would be a little heavy for H-6 to carry. So they'd have to put the tech no a smaller missile.
A B-52H would have carried 4 Skybolt missiles weihing 20t total with missile's quoted operational range of 1.850km. That was almost 50yrs ago.

ZTZ99 · Aug 31, 2010

tphuang said:
H-6K does not need to leave Chinese boundary. CJ-10K has enough range to reach Afghanistan and Guam if air launched within Chinese boundary.

From the western edge of Xinjiang to the eastern edge of Iraq is about 2,500km. To Guam from the southeastern edge of China is over 3,000km. The latest Pentagon report lists the range of DH-10 as "1,500+ km". IMO it's a stretch to think this "+" could be interpreted to mean double the original estimate.

tphuang said:
And if protected by fighters, it can be launched from kashmir or pakistan or one of the stans and hit Iraq with no problem.

Again, which stan, including Pakistan, is going to let China do this? Permission given to launch a Chinese attack from within a stan's airspace would easily be interpreted by the US as an act of war by the stan in question, to speak nothing of China itself.

Skywatcher · Sep 1, 2010

If there are two H-6Ks, it'd be a fair bet to guess that the PLAAF is taking delivery of the bomber.

Incidentally, its theoretical maximum bomb load should be more like 15 tons.

Blitzo · Sep 1, 2010

Scratch said:
Well, I guess if China is going to fight a low-med intensity conflict in wich it's modern fighter force should be able to optain air-supremacy rather quickly, even an old H-6 has it's merrits. It provides a large payload and a loiter capability, combined with guided munitions, if integrated, that allows for a timely engagement of targets of opportunity, that pop up and disappear again.
The US is still using it's B-52s, for the missions in Iraq and A-stan absolutely enough.
And I believe you can still train and develop tactics and employment procedures with these aircraft, so that when PLAAF transitions to a newer airplane, the knowledge is still there.
Regarding big stealth UCAVs, I think that's still way into the future. After the J-8s, China went all the way through the process of building J-11 and J-10 like aircraft to end up being able to produce some kind of a fifth gen fighter at some point. Even with the know-how acquired there, I doubt they could really leap frog all the technology in between H-6 and a stealth UCAV without big problems.

All the FT series and LS and LT PGMs -- while shown at airshows like Zhuhai, haven't properly been seen in service yet, or at least in small numbers. That leads me to think that either production hasn't been cranked up yet, or there are components which china can't supply themselves (sat navigation is one, but wouldn't it be prudent to use GPS and GLONASS while we wait for COMPASS?)...

I think if the H-6 bombers could be converted to carry PGMs then it'd be a massive boost to their capability but the PLAAF but we've barely seen them on JH-7A or J-10's at all... I do wonder how powerful the PLAAF's precision air attack capabilities really are sometimes, -sigh-

Deino · Sep 1, 2010

tphuang said:
H-6K is being shown for the same reason JF-17 and L-15 were shown. It's a XAC self funded project aimed at getting plaaf orders. For higher priority projects like J-10, they have higher classification, so do not get shown right from the beginning.

Remember, H-6K was on the internet right from the start.
....

I agree with You that this is a "strange" point on this project, since - at least i - would suspect a new bomber a much higher secret classification.

On the other side I don't think it is that much comparable to the FC-1/JF-17 and L-15 in the same way, since these two are clearly developed for export. I can't think that the BC-1 would be exported if the PLAAF won't take it.

Deino

tphuang · Sep 1, 2010

Deino said:
I agree with You that this is a "strange" point on this project, since - at least i - would suspect a new bomber a much higher secret classification.

On the other side I don't think it is that much comparable to the FC-1/JF-17 and L-15 in the same way, since these two are clearly developed for export. I can't think that the BC-1 would be exported if the PLAAF won't take it.

Deino

That's true. What I read is that H-6K is a self funded project by XAC, that's why they don't mind showing it. It doesn't have the high level classification that J-10B or J-11B have.

ZTZ99 said:
From the western edge of Xinjiang to the eastern edge of Iraq is about 2,500km. To Guam from the southeastern edge of China is over 3,000km. The latest Pentagon report lists the range of DH-10 as "1,500+ km". IMO it's a stretch to think this "+" could be interpreted to mean double the original estimate.

Again, which stan, including Pakistan, is going to let China do this? Permission given to launch a Chinese attack from within a stan's airspace would easily be interpreted by the US as an act of war by the stan in question, to speak nothing of China itself.

I wouldn't put that much faith in the latest Pentagon report. Its quality isn't that great, lol. I've written in the past about the inconsistencies that I see in it.

Pakistan has basically handed the control of Kashmir to China according to a recent NY times articles. If it still needs to fly further West (even assuming that added distance from Kashmir is still not enough for CJ-10K). If China escorts it with a couple of J-11s providing escort, which of these stans are going to stop that? But in my opinion, CJ-10Ks range will be enough that it's not needed. If CJ-10K is based on KH-55 that China purchased as speculated, do you think its range will be closer to that of KJ-55's 3000 km or Pentagon's estimates of 1500+ km. Which btw, is based on a test from several years ago. And if you don't think it can fly far enough to hit Guam, that's fine, they can hit Krgystan's base.

Please don't use this as a springboard to China vs USA. Let's stick this to targets H-6K can hit and whether it could be useful in its role.

ZTZ99 · Sep 2, 2010

tphuang said:
Pakistan has basically handed the control of Kashmir to China according to a recent NY times articles. If it still needs to fly further West (even assuming that added distance from Kashmir is still not enough for CJ-10K). If China escorts it with a couple of J-11s providing escort, which of these stans are going to stop that? But in my opinion, CJ-10Ks range will be enough that it's not needed. If CJ-10K is based on KH-55 that China purchased as speculated, do you think its range will be closer to that of KJ-55's 3000 km or Pentagon's estimates of 1500+ km. Which btw, is based on a test from several years ago.

I have read that the CJ-10 incorporates elements from the Kh-55 rather than being a straight up copy. I have also read that it is based partly on the technology of the Tomahawk. It is impossible to say that the influence of the Kh-55 or the Tomahawk predisposes this missile to have this range or that range, or that the missile even has an engine which allows a discussion of range comparisons to either missile. When I thought about the possibility of the H-6 attacking Iraq and Guam, I had a roughly 1,500km range in mind. Clearly you think closer to 3,000km.

tphuang said:
Please don't use this as a springboard to China vs USA. Let's stick this to targets H-6K can hit and whether it could be useful in its role.

Who's using this as a springboard to China vs USA? It is totally legitimate to consider the stans' willingness to tolerate the ire of the US in weighing whether or not to allow China to launch against the US inside their own territories. This has been part of the discussion from the beginning, especially the benefit of range gained from launching inside a stan. And I think you are overestimating China's weight when you say it could simply waltz into another country's airspace like a bully with some J-11 escorts, especially a stan who will not automatically be aligned with China and will surely be pissed off enough to seriously consider throwing its lot in with the US in a war if China violated its territory without its permission. Even if just in a passive-aggressive way, like providing the US with intel. You will not be winning friends and influencing people by unilaterally sending a force of bombers and J-11 escorts into another country's territory. It will certainly piss them off in a bad way.

Orthan · Sep 2, 2010

tphuang said:
Pakistan has basically handed the control of Kashmir to China according to a recent NY times articles.

That article has already been denied by both Pakistan and China. Besides, there is no evidence about it.

tphuang · Sep 2, 2010

ZTZ99 said:
I have read that the CJ-10 incorporates elements from the Kh-55 rather than being a straight up copy. I have also read that it is based partly on the technology of the Tomahawk. It is impossible to say that the influence of the Kh-55 or the Tomahawk predisposes this missile to have this range or that range, or that the missile even has an engine which allows a discussion of range comparisons to either missile. When I thought about the possibility of the H-6 attacking Iraq and Guam, I had a roughly 1,500km range in mind. Clearly you think closer to 3,000km.

Who's using this as a springboard to China vs USA? It is totally legitimate to consider the stans' willingness to tolerate the ire of the US in weighing whether or not to allow China to launch against the US inside their own territories. This has been part of the discussion from the beginning, especially the benefit of range gained from launching inside a stan. And I think you are overestimating China's weight when you say it could simply waltz into another country's airspace like a bully with some J-11 escorts, especially a stan who will not automatically be aligned with China and will surely be pissed off enough to seriously consider throwing its lot in with the US in a war if China violated its territory without its permission. Even if just in a passive-aggressive way, like providing the US with intel. You will not be winning friends and influencing people by unilaterally sending a force of bombers and J-11 escorts into another country's territory. It will certainly piss them off in a bad way.[/QUOTEseriously, I was simply asking you as a mod to makle sure that this discussion does not get into the usa vs china pissing match because we've had too many of them recently.
And the first thing I get from you is that I'm accusing you? Chill.

As for cruise missiles, my point was that H-6K provides an additional platform that can be used to hit various us bases around Asia. If you want to turn this into which country China might piss off, then I think you are missing the original point.

Deino · Sep 4, 2010

Seems to be real ... bus slightly psed !

H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

Scratch

Captain

ZTZ99

Banned Idiot

Skywatcher

Captain

Blitzo

Lieutenant General

Deino

Lieutenant General

tphuang

Lieutenant General

ZTZ99

Banned Idiot

Orthan

Senior Member

tphuang

Lieutenant General

Deino

Lieutenant General

Attachments