H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

I

i.e.

Senior Member
hmmwv said:
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.
Click to expand...

yeah but that's Maximum operating,] increase in cruise is what they want.
 
Geographer

Geographer

Junior Member
UAV, Cruise Missile, Ballistic Missile are the way to go ...... cheap, no risk and get the job done easily
Click to expand...
UAVs, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles are not cheap at all! A Tomahawk cruise missile costs $1.45 million according to Wikipedia. Even if you assume China can produce them at 2/3 the cost, that's still a lot money considering each missile is only good for one target: one building, one warehouse, one bridge, one tank, etc. There will be thousands of targets in a full-blown war. The United States military with nearly unlimited money only uses cruise missiles for attacking air defense sites to avoid putting planes at risk. Otherwise it's all laser guided bombs and short-range guided missiles fired from UAVs.

Ballistic missiles are probably even more expensive if you want the kind that has terminal guidance.

The disadvantage of cruise and ballistic missiles is the engine is destroyed with each use. The engine is the most expensive part of an aircraft. A bomber reuses its engines and wings for thousands of missiles. A bomber is just so much more efficient for strategic or even tactical battlefield bombing. The USAF has tested bombers that drop 82+ laser-guided bombs, so carpet bombing need not be indiscriminate.
 
A

antiterror13

Brigadier
Geographer said:
UAVs, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles are not cheap at all! A Tomahawk cruise missile costs $1.45 million according to Wikipedia. Even if you assume China can produce them at 2/3 the cost, that's still a lot money considering each missile is only good for one target: one building, one warehouse, one bridge, one tank, etc. There will be thousands of targets in a full-blown war. The United States military with nearly unlimited money only uses cruise missiles for attacking air defense sites to avoid putting planes at risk. Otherwise it's all laser guided bombs and short-range guided missiles fired from UAVs.

Ballistic missiles are probably even more expensive if you want the kind that has terminal guidance.

The disadvantage of cruise and ballistic missiles is the engine is destroyed with each use. The engine is the most expensive part of an aircraft. A bomber reuses its engines and wings for thousands of missiles. A bomber is just so much more efficient for strategic or even tactical battlefield bombing. The USAF has tested bombers that drop 82+ laser-guided bombs, so carpet bombing need not be indiscriminate.
Click to expand...

Do you know how much B-2 or B-1B are ? B-2 cost $2B each, try flying B-2 into China or Russian airspace .. see what happen :) ... the USAF never done it because they have no confidence it would survive. Even when the USAF had a full confidence on U-2, it got shot by the Chinese in the 60s :)
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
antiterror13 said:
Do you know how much B-2 or B-1B are ? B-2 cost $2B each, try flying B-2 into China or Russian airspace .. see what happen :) ... the USAF never done it because they have no confidence it would survive. Even when the USAF had a full confidence on U-2, it got shot by the Chinese in the 60s :)
Click to expand...

Why should USAF try to fly B-2 into china or russia airspace? They are not at war.
The U-2s they shot down during the 1960s are operated jointly by RoCAF and CIA.
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
:)

JUVIR.jpg
 
I

i.e.

Senior Member
Geographer said:
UAVs, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles are not cheap at all! A Tomahawk cruise missile costs $1.45 million according to Wikipedia. Even if you assume China can produce them at 2/3 the cost, that's still a lot money considering each missile is only good for one target: one building, one warehouse, one bridge, one tank, etc. There will be thousands of targets in a full-blown war. The United States military with nearly unlimited money only uses cruise missiles for attacking air defense sites to avoid putting planes at risk. Otherwise it's all laser guided bombs and short-range guided missiles fired from UAVs.

Ballistic missiles are probably even more expensive if you want the kind that has terminal guidance.

The disadvantage of cruise and ballistic missiles is the engine is destroyed with each use. The engine is the most expensive part of an aircraft. A bomber reuses its engines and wings for thousands of missiles. A bomber is just so much more efficient for strategic or even tactical battlefield bombing. The USAF has tested bombers that drop 82+ laser-guided bombs, so carpet bombing need not be indiscriminate.
Click to expand...

Yeah but HUman Pilots are expensive too.
I think some one did a cost analysis and concluded that a V-2 was more cost effective in term of munition delivered per RM cost. vs a comparable medium bomber, given bomber's chance of survival after x number of missions etc.

also remember at that time strategic bombing rarely came with in couple Km of where they intend the bombs to be.

also today, terminal guidance on ballsitics missiles are not hard. think BMs are a releaser of smart munitions, (JDAMS, LGMs etc)
 
Last edited:
D

drunkmunky

Junior Member
russia went to icbm's because the cost of strategic bombers were too great.
totally shut down north american sac as a result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top