Unless I misunderstand something, even H20s would not be able to hit CONUS and return. I do not believe China is even seeking to build conventional capabilities that hold CONUS at risk. Too unrealistic. Only nuclear and cyber.
As long as the US refrains from attacking targets within mainland China in a Pacific War 2.0, then China has little reasons to attack targets within CONUS either.
But if Murican missiles do land on mainland Chinese soil, then it is only appropriate for Chinese missiles to land on mainland Murican soil (i.e. CONUS) as well - Whether that be conventional warheads or nuclear warheads.
However, it should be stressed that (key) targets located on Hawaii, Alaska and western CONUS should be prioritized than (key) targets situated elsewhere in times of Pacific War 2.0. Unless the defensive capabilities of the US and Canada have been severely degraded, China is very unlikely to get close to blow up that USAF Plant 4 (one of the F-35 assembly lines) in Fort Worth, Texas, for instance.
~~~
In the meantime, speaking of conducting conventional strikes against targets in Hawaii, Alaska and western CONUS from China by air, there are
three conditions which must be met:
#1 - Strategic bombers that are capable of travelling very long distances;
#2 - Mid-route refueling support; and most importantly
#3 - Ultra long-range standoff missile for land attack and/or anti-ship roles.
For capability #1, that would be the much-anticipated H-20 for the PLAAF.
It has been widely assumed that the H-20 has a broadly similar performance profile as the B-2 Spirit, which has a range of ~6000 nautical miles (~11100 kilometers) without refueling, and ~10000 nautical miles (~18500 kilometers) with one refueling.
Assuming that the effective combat radius of the H-20 is one-third of its one-way range with substantial payloads onboard:
1. ~3700 kilometers without refueling; and
2. ~6100 kilometers with one refueling, which relates to capability #2.
With the H-20s based in Wuhan:
1. A ~3700-kilometer effective combat radius is enough to cover pretty much the entire 1IC and most of the entire 2IC (including Guam, but not Papua New Guinea); while
2. A ~6100-kilometer effective combat radius is enough to cover much of the 2.5IC (including Wake and Papua New Guinea, but not Midway), and right up to the middle of the Aleutians.
Yet, in order to strike targets in Hawaii, Alaska and western CONUS, capabilities #2 and #3 are must-haves, apart from moving the H-20's basing location to somewhere in northeastern China. From now onwards, we'll use the city of Changchun instead of Wuhan.
Speaking of capability #2 - China does have the great help of Russia. More specifically, Russia offers the PLAAF H-20s with two great options:
1. Land at friendly Russian air bases in the Russian Far East to refuel, and/or
2. Conduct mid-air refueling with the YY-20A/Bs based in the Russian Far East while overflying the Russian Far East and/or the Sea of Okhotsk (which would require friendly airspace-control support by the Russian Air Force and the Russian Navy) -
While en-route to conduct long-range strike missions against targets in Hawaii, Alaska and western CONUS.
With capabilities #1 and #2 settled, let's move onto the most important of all - Capability #3.
Of course, dropping guided bombs onto targets from 10s or 100+ kilometers away is certainly much desirable in terms of costs and strike bandwidth than launching missiles from 1000+ or 2000+ kilometers away. However, strike missions today and into the future conducted in highly-contested airspaces typically employ standoff missiles that are launched from standoff distances, in order to enhance the survivability of understandably-expensive strike platforms (including the H-20).
For this case, China does have the KD-20 (air-launched variant of the CJ-10), which has a strike range of ~2000-2500 kilometers. If the KD-20s can be adapted for the H-20s, this would increase the effective strike range of the H-20s to ~8100-8600 kilometers. This essentially puts Anchorage and Oahu within the effective strike range of the H-20s armed with KD-20s, of which the KD-20s will be launched while flying high above the Bering Sea or the NorthPac.
Doing so would also minimize the chances of the H-20s being exposed to direct enemy interception efforts by fighters stationed in Japan, Alaska and the Aleutians through avoiding the need to venture close to or enter enemy-controlled airspaces in order to release strike payloads.
Meanwhile, in order to expand the H-20's effective strike range even further in order to cover western CONUS, standoff missiles with even longer strike ranges (~4000+ kilometers) are definitely required.
~~~
In a nutshell, expeditionary conventional strikes against targets on the EastPac side and the western CONUS are definitely possible for China, as long as all three of the aforementioned capabilities are met.
