H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions
- Thread starter F40Racer
- Start date
Red___Sword
Junior Member
With all due respect, how dose this "export J-11" post pop out in this "H-6 bomber" thread?
I simply believe China will not export J-11 in near future, even if China have full indigenous engines. Military export is first of all, a political move, then a commercial move.
China don't lack the money anyway, why potentially piss off (fairly speaking, nothing else to export) Su-27 owner for the cash?
Is the 2nd aircraft an H-6K?
It appears to be one of the long-range H-6x naval strike versions - I base this on the ugly bulging white radome that is immediately underneath and behind the nose.
Since the bombardier's position is no longer needed, (probably also that of the flight engineer), why can't the PLAN have a radar installed in the nose of the H-6 rather than have that ugly, drag-producing bulge?
It appears to be one of the long-range H-6x naval strike versions - I base this on the ugly bulging white radome that is immediately underneath and behind the nose.
Since the bombardier's position is no longer needed, (probably also that of the flight engineer), why can't the PLAN have a radar installed in the nose of the H-6 rather than have that ugly, drag-producing bulge?
usaf0314
Junior Member
honestly if you ask me, the H-6 is way too old and does not contribute much to the strategic bombing role. The most it can carry is 2 cruise missiles or something similar. one might argue that the U.S. have been using the B-52 for almost half a century now, but do realize the B-52 got a much larger payload and range than the H-6. as of today, the most useful role for the H-6 is its air refueling capability for the PLAAF and PLAN, other than that, I don't see any other practical use that can not be substituted in by other PLAAF combat aircraft. China needs its own strategic bomber and tanker!
it is still "green house" nose canopy. rather than radar sensor.
this mean that the aircraft might still rely on analog.
reason why H-6 still in service was her bomb load. during the vietnam war, B-52 was use as "tactical bomber" while phantom jet was use as "strategic bomber"!
this mean that the aircraft might still rely on analog.
reason why H-6 still in service was her bomb load. during the vietnam war, B-52 was use as "tactical bomber" while phantom jet was use as "strategic bomber"!
Last edited:
Nah the latest iteration (H-6K) can carry 6 tomahawk ranged cruise missiles and has been re engined, rebuilt and has new avionics so it has much greater range and capability in general -- so it can certainly act as a potent stand off platform.
The H-6K retains its internal weapons bay as well and has an optics ball on the underside of the aircraft. I feel it could act as a loitering precision bomb truck for support of ground forces (once air superiority has been secured) with little modification, and the additional wing pylons for cruise missiles should be able to support racks of pgms as well.
While older H-6s will be phased out, the H-6K still has a viable future though I agree China needs a larger tanker (transport) aircraft. A stealthy bomber like the B-2 would be nice but is a way off yet. They might even go directly for orbital/suborbital bombers instead.