Supersonic Nuclear Precision Bomber for PLAAF ??

sumdud

sumdud

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Russia retired their Backfires?

Backfire is perfect for China. The Fullback is only fighting with the JH-7B(Well, The JH-7 can get a better engine, and as it's an upgrade, it's not going to be the A anymore.) The Blackjack is simply too large. It's impressive, but who needs such a big bomber? It's simply too big. And China have not the maintence.

The Backfire can launch many missiles, hold many bombs. LACMs, ASMs, not as much as the Blackjack, but enough. It's got a HUGE nose, so you can launch long range ASMs, LACMs, standing off in the mean time, act as a AEW (Or even AWACS if you take away some of the room, but it's not going to be a 360 coverage.) It holds enough bombs to level an industrial estate/manor or a convoy.

With the large fleet of them sitting around, you can get a lot of spares. As for the stuff they took out, you can replace them with those of Chinese codes. And the refueling probe, you can also install your own probe.(But China needs a better refueler than the H-6...)
 
MIGleader

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
sumdud said:
Russia retired their Backfires?

Backfire is perfect for China. The Fullback is only fighting with the JH-7B(Well, The JH-7 can get a better engine, and as it's an upgrade, it's not going to be the A anymore.) The Blackjack is simply too large. It's impressive, but who needs such a big bomber? It's simply too big. And China have not the maintence.

The Backfire can launch many missiles, hold many bombs. LACMs, ASMs, not as much as the Blackjack, but enough. It's got a HUGE nose, so you can launch long range ASMs, LACMs, standing off in the mean time, act as a AEW (Or even AWACS if you take away some of the room, but it's not going to be a 360 coverage.) It holds enough bombs to level an industrial estate/manor or a convoy.

With the large fleet of them sitting around, you can get a lot of spares. As for the stuff they took out, you can replace them with those of Chinese codes. And the refueling probe, you can also install your own probe.(But China needs a better refueler than the H-6...)
Click to expand...


i do agree that china needs the backfire. but about the jh-7, i think it is not such a great design. china may already be developing an attacker based on the fullback, but it may come out with j-xx. when the su-32 becomes ready for export, china should buy a few. the backfire gives the plaaf a long range strategic bombing abilities, and bragging rights. spares may be a problem, but u can always import a few from russia. a refuel probe takes it to far. the backfire must be seen as a regional power aircrft, not a super range attack bomber.
 
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
The PLAAF/PLAN may need the JH-7 because it's the only semi-modern martine strike aircraft they have that can launch domestically made anti-ship missiles.

The Su-30 is a far better platform, but I don't think the Russians like the idea of PRC using its own missiles on it. They'd rather have the PRC import Russian missiles to make $$ on the sale.

Personally I'm not in favor of having more aircraft types. It adds a lot of overhead in maintenance, support, spares, etc. There's a lot of things that goes into the support part, like you have to maintain manufacturing facilities to produce replacement parts, engines, etc.

IMO the $ is better off being saved with fewer aircraft types, and spent on R&D for improvements or future generation aircraft. BUT, at the same time, having built the JH-7 does provide the PRC aviation industry some much-needed experience.
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
If you read the recent Kanwa article, it confirms what I said before, China is developing its own version of su-32, basically as a follow up to JH-7A
 
Chairman Hu

Chairman Hu

Banned Idiot
Of course China needs the Blackjack, just think of a dozen of those flying overhead some country China is at war with and unload itz massive payload of napalm cluster bomb

General T. Sherman (Union) - "War is a cruel thing, the crueler it gets, the sooner it ends"

Maintance cost? Nah China is good enough to built a bomber to have as much payload as 30-40 tons, napalm may be cruel, but it will force countries to surrender faster...

Russia has 30 of them!!?!?!? Thats not bad actually, since the US has about 15-20 B-2s the last time I checked

Buying Su-32s? Not a bad idea, since the Su-34 wont be saled, the Russians are just starting to get them

Tu-22M3... People, I think these planes are PRC's best solution, the Su-32 is great but... the Backfire is MUCH better. Even buying 24 will give China a MUCH needed lead to compare to the US and Russia, spare parts!? Nah China will find a solution, just like that Ws-10 engine.
 
L

Lavi

Junior Member
The Tu-22M3 is the best medium bomber out there, anywhere in the world. It fills a gap between aircrafts like the F-15E and the B-1. Also, maritime strike, which is something China needs, is one of its main capabilities.

But from what source have you found out that Russia would be retiring their Backfires? As far as I know they will stay in service for quite long still.
 
V

vincelee

Junior Member
supposedly the Tu-22M3 no longer serves a purpose in the current Russian doctrine, so they're retiring the entire Backfire fleet to save cost. Whatever strategic roles will be fullfilled by the newly upgraded (conventionalized) Tu-160s.
 
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
vincelee said:
supposedly the Tu-22M3 no longer serves a purpose in the current Russian doctrine, so they're retiring the entire Backfire fleet to save cost. Whatever strategic roles will be fullfilled by the newly upgraded (conventionalized) Tu-160s.
Click to expand...


Didn't the Russians used the Blackjack in Chechnia?

I beleive the Russians are producing Blackjacks again but at a very slow rate. I don't think these planes are for export.
 
Last edited:
Gollevainen

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Didn't the Russians used the Blackjack in Chechnia?
Click to expand...

???? Against the tsetsen-rebels? Why on earht would they use biggest and most sophisticated STRATEGIC BOMBERS against gureilians whose are almoust impossiple to engange form air by planes actually suited for that kind of task...you must got it wrong somehow...
 
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Gollevainen said:
???? Against the tsetsen-rebels? Why on earht would they use biggest and most sophisticated STRATEGIC BOMBERS against gureilians whose are almoust impossiple to engange form air by planes actually suited for that kind of task...you must got it wrong somehow...
Click to expand...


For PR purposes. Hey US uses its B-2 against the Taliban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top