H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

antiterror13

Brigadier
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.

Bomber is an obsolete concept anyway, expensive, too risky and too easy to get shot when penetrate deep into enemy airspace. Unless you are facing third rated country (i.e Afgh, Somalia, Iraq), it is just a sitting duck.

UAV, Cruise Missile, Ballistic Missile are the way to go ...... cheap, no risk and get the job done easily
 

hmmwv

Junior Member
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.

Both a B1B style supersonic LO platform and a B2 style subsonic VLO platforms were considered and I believe PLAAF went with the VLO subsonic design.
 

Hyperwarp

Captain
...A new long-range strategic bomber has been studied at 603 Institute/XAC since late 90s. One configuration is a supersonic bomber with a conventional design, another is a stealth flying wing design similar to American B-2. Scale-down models were built. The final configuration selected by PLAAF which will go into full-scale development is still a closely guarded secret.

So the final decision is not known. But the VLO design is following the B-2 -
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

i.e.

Senior Member
Both a B1B style supersonic LO platform and a B2 style subsonic VLO platforms were considered and I believe PLAAF went with the VLO subsonic design.

yeah but next usaf secret bomber project would most likely be faster then b2.
 

hmmwv

Junior Member
Well PLAAF will have to wait for USAF to come up with their hypersonic bomber before it can be copied, since China doesn't really need global strike capabilities subsonic is good enough.
 

Franklin

Captain
Originally posted by antiterror13

Bomber is an obsolete concept anyway, expensive, too risky and too easy to get shot when penetrate deep into enemy airspace. Unless you are facing third rated country (i.e Afgh, Somalia, Iraq), it is just a sitting duck.

UAV, Cruise Missile, Ballistic Missile are the way to go ...... cheap, no risk and get the job done easily

That's not necessarily true, the majority of the bombs being dropped in Afghanistan in support of US ground troops comes from B1B bombers. And small planes, cruise missiles and drones simply cannot perform certain tasks that the big strategic bombers can.

The Air Force similarly provides examples of its "big box" aircraft -- its long-range bombers -- outliving many generations of smaller fighter aircraft. Now in its sixth decade of service, the B-52 has seen careers as a nuclear bomber, a cruise missile "truck," and as a conventional bomber flying close air support missions in Afghanistan with satellite-guided bombs. Now it is reinventing itself once again for maritime missions in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. The 1970s vintage B-1 bomber has followed a similar path, from the nuclear mission in the 1980s to one of the premier close air support aircraft over Afghanistan. It is the B-1, not small fighters, that has dropped 60 percent of the bombs in support of ground troops in Afghanistan. And like the B-52s, the B-1s are now outfitting for maritime reconnaissance and strike contingencies. The Air Force's big bombers have been adaptable because they have had the space and electrical power to take on new equipment and because their large payload bays have provided the flexibility to accept a wider variety of munitions. Finally, their long range has meant that theater basing constraints have never been an issue.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

asif iqbal

Lieutenant General
Well PLAAF will have to wait for USAF to come up with their hypersonic bomber before it can be copied, since China doesn't really need global strike capabilities subsonic is good enough.

there is a picture in this months AFM of the future bomber for the USAF, it looks pretty similar to B2
 

i.e.

Senior Member
Well PLAAF will have to wait for USAF to come up with their hypersonic bomber before it can be copied, since China doesn't really need global strike capabilities subsonic is good enough.

Not hypersonic but probablly high subsonic.

china don;t need global strike true but so was USAAF before ww2.

the fact PLAAF will operate in the pacific is along cause for a longer range strike platform.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Not hypersonic but probablly high subsonic.

china don;t need global strike true but so was USAAF before ww2.

the fact PLAAF will operate in the pacific is along cause for a longer range strike platform.

Agreed. I would love PLAAF to have a slightly downsized B-2, high subsonic, leveraging stealth tech they learned from their 5th gen fighter programs, four non after burning WS-10s flying wing but with space allowing for various EW modules and especially cyberwar fare growth. A pacific wide combat radius without refuelling and <15 tons of payload. Oh wait, this sounds exactly like USAF's design goals for NGB... Hmm
 

hmmwv

Junior Member
Not hypersonic but probablly high subsonic.

china don;t need global strike true but so was USAAF before ww2.

the fact PLAAF will operate in the pacific is along cause for a longer range strike platform.

B2 is already pretty high subsonic (M0.95) so when you said "faster than B-2" then it implies super sonic or even hyper sonic. China will not have a global military presence and global strike capabilities in the foreseeable future. There is no question that the new bomber is PLAAF's long range strike platform, but I very much doubt it's in the same league as USAF's long range strike platforms, my guesstimate is that it'll have a combat radius between 2000 and 3000km, so targets 4000-5000km away can be hit with air launched cruise missiles, that's slightly more than half of B2's figures, but plenty for Asia Pacific region.
 
Top