JH-7/JH-7A/JH-7B Thread

[Blitzo]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

yeah that's what's its good for, but so is a modified Tu22M which can lift more, fly faster and further.

I wonder if Tu-22s cost more to maintain though. And while I agree H-6K isn't survivable against a modern well armed opponent, I think it is a wise gap filler until a real new bomber is developed.

Better have a gap filler and jump forward to a next generation instead of buying or developing a half baked Tu-22M3 equivalent which probably won't be survivable sometime post 2020

 

[hardware]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

yeah that's what's its good for, but so is a modified Tu22M which can lift more, fly faster and further.

single russian AF TU-22M was shoot down by georgian air defense.

 

[latenlazy]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

single russian AF TU-22M was shoot down by georgian air defense.

Then imagine how an H-6 would fare.

 

[hardware]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

the overall size probably slightly bigger than FB-111,smaller than Tu-16 (H-6) ,notice her landing gear.landing gear design for large fighter bomber, not for a medium range bomber.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

Over at CJDB they're locking threads discussing this. Some posts have said threads have been deleted also.

 

[Blitzo]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

the overall size probably slightly bigger than FB-111,smaller than Tu-16 (H-6) ,notice her landing gear.landing gear design for large fighter bomber, not for a medium range bomber.

Probably a mistake on model makers part.

 

[Totoro]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

I don't see it having four engines. That would suggest a much larger plane than is really needed for China in the next 30 or so years. Two modern ws15 class variant engines should be more than enough for a very large strike plane or medium sized bomber, whatever you want to call it. tu160 has 3,5 kn of thrust per ton. tu22m3 has 4 kn. su-34 has 6 kn per ton. b-1b has 2.6 tons, etc.

Next gen bomber is most likely to be in h6's weight class. 70-80 ton plane would be more than enough for the missions China needs. And even if the engines are just 160 kn or so, we're still talking thrust to weight ratio of tu22m for a two engined plane.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

Over at CJDB they're locking threads discussing this. Some posts have said threads have been deleted also.

Maybe they are doing so to dismiss it rather than to stop the rumors; the same thing happened when the photoshopped photos of the JH-7B came out.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

the overall size probably slightly bigger than FB-111,smaller than Tu-16 (H-6) ,notice her landing gear.landing gear design for large fighter bomber, not for a medium range bomber.

Honestly it would be illogical to compare this plane with any other flying right now. This clearly is an offshoot of its own class and the PLAAF would certainly be interested in something asymmetrical.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Re: JH-7/JH-7A Thread

via hongjian, cdf

Those guys sure work fast.

But I'm not sure on the scaling of this plane. I remember how there was talk of a Su-34 sized bomber... but this thing looks far bigger than Su-34

A couple of things smell fishy when it comes to that model:
- the fact that the model was displayed clearly in an exhibition and yet people are deleting threads on it online
- the fact that if the flying wing is indeed an H-X, it wouldn't make sense for the PLAAF to invest in two designs
- the fact that no military insider has mentioned such a thing before the model was revealed
- the fact that the same design appeared in fanboy drawings before