H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions
- Thread starter F40Racer
- Start date
You will be pleasantly surprised.
china has NEVER developed a strategic bomber before, and i dont think that WS-10 can do it. They will have to wait for WS-15. Im not saying that they will never do it, but i dont think we will see any new chinese strategic bomber anytime soon.
MwRYum
Major
Or, the PLAAF will design a bomber that can take advantage of the most important aspects of the existing infrastructure while meeting their mission parameters and save the cost of a lot of the upgrade.
We shall see.
I veiw the venerable H-6 like the US B-52Hs. Basically they have been turned into missile launchers for standoff weapons. For the later module H-6s with their capability to carry 6 ALCM, this is a significant capability and if the missiles have good range and good electronic capabilities, they are a potent force for either land attack or strike at sea missions. And certainly continued air support with non stand-off, non-precision bombs when air dominance is maintained for close support.
The US uses the B-52Hs similarly. Lots of use in the last years from desert Strom (1991) on through that war, the Serbian war, Afghanistan,again in Iraq, etc. They have been used in both the loiter Close Air Support role with less sophisticated weapons, and in the standoff roll with ALCMs.
Of course the B-52H can carry either 20 ALCMs or 12 of the latest Harpoon missiles. The reason for the difference is that the Harpoon will not fit on the internal bomb bay Common Strategic Rotary Launcher (CSRL) which holds eight missiles. Six missiles fit on lon pylons under each wing inboard of the first engines...for a total of twelve on the wings.
Here's 12 ALCMs under on the two wing pylons.
Here's the CSRL internal to the B-52 with eight ALCMs.
Jeff, if only you've some idea how small the Tu-16/H-6 is then you'd agree with me on this:
That's a real deal, not model, display in the museum just outside Beijing.
And now look at its weapon's bay...
You're an American so you should've some idea how big a B-52 is...and since I've seen one up close on the ground during an airshow in Canada I do have a good idea how big a B-52 is.
It's nigh unfair to compare B-52 and H-6 really...B-52 is so big that subsequent bombers can use the structures that can accommodate it with necessary modifications to suit, but any new bombers that to replace H-6 need to be much bigger in order to have a practical payload and fuel stores, that naturally demands new and bigger facilities.
Last edited:
Why do they need WS15? My understanding is that it's a subsonic stealth bomber that has less range and payload than B2 or B1, strategic in the sense of the PLAAF doctrine, not a USAF strategic bomber equivalent. China has designed strategic bomber before in the form of the four or six Spey MK202 powered H8 in the 80s, they never made to prototyping stage though. I agree that we won't see the new bomber anytime soon, but I was disputing i.e.'s assessment that the project is at 10 on a 100 scale.
You will be pleasantly surprised.
I hope so too.
a stealthy B1B sized aircraft is what china needs. 4 WS-10 derivative much same as B1B's 4xF101. well...
it would be ironic wouldn't it.
i dont believe china needs a true strategic bomber in the next several decades. something in size of tu22m/avro vulcan is quite enough, me thinks. with current tech, it should still be able to achieve considerable range...
and two next gen ws10 engines, meaning something based on engines for j20, should be quite enough for such a tactical bomber.
and two next gen ws10 engines, meaning something based on engines for j20, should be quite enough for such a tactical bomber.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Pupu the insider rumored that the H-X bomber would be very similar to the B-2.
Vini_Vidi_Vici
Junior Member
As a major power, especially a future dominant power, China needs everything in every field, especially for something as crucial as strategic bombers. For example, if the tension become too hot in the South China Sea, bombing the crap out of the ASEAN countries with missiles is too expensive. Conventional bomber is a much cheaper alternative.
MwRYum
Major
Bomber offers a more flexible platform but until air dominance is attained, the only safe operational role is cruise missile launch platform, which could complicate the OpFor defense options in terms of at which direction to concentrate its air defense - that said, if you're thinking of massive JDAM bombardment the first thing PLA need to attain is total air dominance, which such ability is still to be seen.
Should, if and when the need of turning Hanoi and Manila into smoldering craters ever arises, the current arsenal of ballistic missiles are more than adequate to do the job, and they're far more difficult to intercept.
That is still remain in the realm of wet dream, as far as we can tell.