H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)

[tphuang]

Saw this recently

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I'd be surprised if China isn't doing something similar. I think GJ-11 is the first modern UCAV that China has. As in, it is a very stealth looking design that uses a modern turbofan engine and hold real payload that can do quite a bit of damage. By the time H-20 is ready to join service, I think we will have follow-on class to GJ-11 that will have longer range and carry more payload. They need to keep make sure their turbofan engine production is high enough so that even UAV/UCAVs can use them. Most of their UAV/UCAVs are still using rocket motors, turbojet, turboprop or piston engines. They are like after thought.

Allowing H-20 to control a host of larger stealth UCAVs will multiply the power/effectiveness of H-20. Some of the UCAVs could be used to conduct electronic warfare, other UCAVs can carry ARMs or stand off missiles or PGMs. And maybe you pair all of that with a few J-20s for escort. Maybe have a few refueling drones there also. That's the best way you can hit far away target.

H-20 is likely to have lower specs in both range and payload vs B-21. But it should have comparable requirement for stealth (at least in the same vicinity as B-2) and electronics. As such, the range requirement for accompanying UCAVs would also be lower than their American counterpart.

The ideal drone bomber would be a fly wing design that uses 1 or 2 turbofan engine (ideally high by pass one like WS-20) that can have combat radius of 4000 km and at least 3t of payload (can carry either 12 250 kg PGM or 4 ARMs).

 

[ecaedus]

How many large jet aircraft has China designed and built? How many clean-sheet jet aircraft, of any stripe, has China designed and built? Now compare that to Russia and the US. It's not even close.

not to mention any turbofan/jet engines that were developed indigenously from scratch...saying China has the "same experience" as rus or us is like saying you have the "same experience" in boxing as Mike Tyson

 

[james smith esq]

Hey guys.

Don't know was it for real... but in more than two Chinese internet forums there was a rumor that a big black chick was just 'taxiing' in the meadow of a northern chicken farm today.

Let's wait for further news but... wow!

I don’t know about the rumor, but I sho’ am hungry, now!

 

[Blitzo]

Saw this recently

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I'd be surprised if China isn't doing something similar. I think GJ-11 is the first modern UCAV that China has. As in, it is a very stealth looking design that uses a modern turbofan engine and hold real payload that can do quite a bit of damage. By the time H-20 is ready to join service, I think we will have follow-on class to GJ-11 that will have longer range and carry more payload. They need to keep make sure their turbofan engine production is high enough so that even UAV/UCAVs can use them. Most of their UAV/UCAVs are still using rocket motors, turbojet, turboprop or piston engines. They are like after thought.

Allowing H-20 to control a host of larger stealth UCAVs will multiply the power/effectiveness of H-20. Some of the UCAVs could be used to conduct electronic warfare, other UCAVs can carry ARMs or stand off missiles or PGMs. And maybe you pair all of that with a few J-20s for escort. Maybe have a few refueling drones there also. That's the best way you can hit far away target.

H-20 is likely to have lower specs in both range and payload vs B-21. But it should have comparable requirement for stealth (at least in the same vicinity as B-2) and electronics. As such, the range requirement for accompanying UCAVs would also be lower than their American counterpart.

The ideal drone bomber would be a fly wing design that uses 1 or 2 turbofan engine (ideally high by pass one like WS-20) that can have combat radius of 4000 km and at least 3t of payload (can carry either 12 250 kg PGM or 4 ARMs).

Why do you think that H-20 will be smaller than B-21? I think it is virtually confirmed now that H-20 will be powered by four non afterburning WS-10s, and in a stealthy flying wing configuration that would lend it to a B-2 sized aircraft (which uses similar thrust F-118s

B-21 is to be powered by two non-AB F-135s, which while individually they are of course more powerful than F-118 or non-AB WS-10, however the total thrust available and the use of a stealthy flying wing configuration, will still be quite a bit less than B-2 or H-20s expected powerplant.


As for drones, I think MUMT is certainly going to be the future for all modern combat aircraft, but I don't think stealthy strike UCAVs will be the sole purview of stealth bombers like H-20 or B-21.

Instead, I expect all new MUMT UCAVs/UAVs to be plug and play with different types of manned aircraft.
E.g. J-20s or J-XYs or PLA 6th gen or H-20, will all be capable of commanding A2A UCAVs or A2G/strike UCAVs or ISR or AEW UAVs (or a mixture thereof), limited only by onboard datalinking and processing power and by humans onboard.
For certain missions, it may make more sense for XYZ aircraft to control a given type or mix of types of UCAVs/UAVs as needed.

 

[weig2000]

Why do you think that H-20 will be smaller than B-21? I think it is virtually confirmed now that H-20 will be powered by four non afterburning WS-10s, and in a stealthy flying wing configuration that would lend it to a B-2 sized aircraft (which uses similar thrust F-118s

B-21 is to be powered by two non-AB F-135s, which while individually they are of course more powerful than F-118 or non-AB WS-10, however the total thrust available and the use of a stealthy flying wing configuration, will still be quite a bit less than B-2 or H-20s expected powerplant.

It makes absolutely no sense to develop the first strategic stealth bomber smaller than B-21, in terms of range and payload. What would be the requirements for such a bomber? What would be its intended use for such a strategic bomber? Bombing Guam? Japanese airports?

 

[ZeEa5KPul]

H-20 is likely to have lower specs in both range and payload vs B-21.

Why do you assume this? Do you have information regarding the H-20's specifications?

But it should have comparable requirement for stealth (at least in the same vicinity as B-2) and electronics.

Should it? China, being condemned to inferiority to America until the Sun becomes a red giant, surely couldn't dream of having a stealth bomber with comparable RCS to an American one.

 

[Hyper]

Saw this recently

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I'd be surprised if China isn't doing something similar. I think GJ-11 is the first modern UCAV that China has. As in, it is a very stealth looking design that uses a modern turbofan engine and hold real payload that can do quite a bit of damage. By the time H-20 is ready to join service, I think we will have follow-on class to GJ-11 that will have longer range and carry more payload. They need to keep make sure their turbofan engine production is high enough so that even UAV/UCAVs can use them. Most of their UAV/UCAVs are still using rocket motors, turbojet, turboprop or piston engines. They are like after thought.

Allowing H-20 to control a host of larger stealth UCAVs will multiply the power/effectiveness of H-20. Some of the UCAVs could be used to conduct electronic warfare, other UCAVs can carry ARMs or stand off missiles or PGMs. And maybe you pair all of that with a few J-20s for escort. Maybe have a few refueling drones there also. That's the best way you can hit far away target.

H-20 is likely to have lower specs in both range and payload vs B-21. But it should have comparable requirement for stealth (at least in the same vicinity as B-2) and electronics. As such, the range requirement for accompanying UCAVs would also be lower than their American counterpart.

The ideal drone bomber would be a fly wing design that uses 1 or 2 turbofan engine (ideally high by pass one like WS-20) that can have combat radius of 4000 km and at least 3t of payload (can carry either 12 250 kg PGM or 4 ARMs).

Woah. Smaller than b-21. That is called as a f-15.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Hey guys.

Don't know was it for real... but in more than two Chinese internet forums there was a rumor that a big black chick was just 'taxiing' in the meadow of a northern chicken farm today.

Let's wait for further news but... wow!

Another cryptic Weibo post from a semi-reliable PLA watcher (OneNinety):

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

这就热搜了？？？#西安飞机##190视角#

Anyone have a clue what he/she is talking about? How about a translation?

 

[tphuang]

Why do you think that H-20 will be smaller than B-21? I think it is virtually confirmed now that H-20 will be powered by four non afterburning WS-10s, and in a stealthy flying wing configuration that would lend it to a B-2 sized aircraft (which uses similar thrust F-118s

B-21 is to be powered by two non-AB F-135s, which while individually they are of course more powerful than F-118 or non-AB WS-10, however the total thrust available and the use of a stealthy flying wing configuration, will still be quite a bit less than B-2 or H-20s expected powerplant.


As for drones, I think MUMT is certainly going to be the future for all modern combat aircraft, but I don't think stealthy strike UCAVs will be the sole purview of stealth bombers like H-20 or B-21.

Instead, I expect all new MUMT UCAVs/UAVs to be plug and play with different types of manned aircraft.
E.g. J-20s or J-XYs or PLA 6th gen or H-20, will all be capable of commanding A2A UCAVs or A2G/strike UCAVs or ISR or AEW UAVs (or a mixture thereof), limited only by onboard datalinking and processing power and by humans onboard.
For certain missions, it may make more sense for XYZ aircraft to control a given type or mix of types of UCAVs/UAVs as needed.

I made a mistake of not looking further into B-21. I just assumed it would be similar in size to B-2, because that's what it is replacing. So, I was comparing in my head the range/payload of B-2 vs what Huitong's page and DoD report posted as estimated range/payload for H-20. Huitong's page changed the H-20 engine to WS-18. Not really sure his reason for making that changes. So, while I agree that WS-10 is more likely, I will put engine has an unknown right now. For example, why don't they use something like WS-20 on H-20 to get better fuel burn rate?

If H-20 can achieve greater than 17t payload at 4500 km, that's even better. Conservatively, I am using those numbers. Even 4500 km combat radius would be pretty good. That's basically where B-2 is at. I'm expecting B-21 to have longer combat radius than that based on statements made by USAF.

I was writing that more to think about how they can utilize H-20 in a command/multiplier type of role. We've discussed what kind of missions they could try with a H-20 led attacking group before, so I won't reiterate here. Looking at GJ-11, we see a really promising UCAV that is clearly very stealthy, can carry small amount of PGMs and have pretty good endurance. What's the next step beyond that if PLAAF wants additional bombers that can fly with H-20 to attack air bases at long range. I'd think large internal bomb bays that can carry more PGMs and missiles would be a start. Longer range through larger fuel tank. Maybe 2 WS-10 engines. Both leading and trail edge conformal radar/EW antenna that's focused on ground targets.

 

[Blitzo]

I made a mistake of not looking further into B-21. I just assumed it would be similar in size to B-2, because that's what it is replacing. So, I was comparing in my head the range/payload of B-2 vs what Huitong's page and DoD report posted as estimated range/payload for H-20. Huitong's page changed the H-20 engine to WS-18. Not really sure his reason for making that changes. So, while I agree that WS-10 is more likely, I will put engine has an unknown right now. For example, why don't they use something like WS-20 on H-20 to get better fuel burn rate?

WS-20 is a high bypass engine -- if we see how big the nacelle for it is for Y-20B, that is how big it will have to be on H-20.
I.e. basically impossible, because you need to bury the engine inside the aircraft for VLO purposes.
B-2, B-21 both use non afterburning variants of turbofans developed for fighter aircraft for that reason as well.

Same logic applies to WS-10s.

WS-18 as a rumour is probably due to questions about whether non-AB WS-10 is ready or not, thus WS-18 as a not very high bypass engine might be able to work as an interim engine.

If H-20 can achieve greater than 17t payload at 4500 km, that's even better. Conservatively, I am using those numbers. Even 4500 km combat radius would be pretty good. That's basically where B-2 is at. I'm expecting B-21 to have longer combat radius than that based on statements made by USAF.

With respect to @huitong, I don't think anyone knows what kind of range or payload number H-20 will specifically have. I don't take 4500km as any sort of likely number yet.

For B-21, I expect B-21 to have a shorter combat radius and shorter payload than B-2.
I'm surprised as to why you expect it to be greater?

I was writing that more to think about how they can utilize H-20 in a command/multiplier type of role. We've discussed what kind of missions they could try with a H-20 led attacking group before, so I won't reiterate here. Looking at GJ-11, we see a really promising UCAV that is clearly very stealthy, can carry small amount of PGMs and have pretty good endurance. What's the next step beyond that if PLAAF wants additional bombers that can fly with H-20 to attack air bases at long range. I'd think large internal bomb bays that can carry more PGMs and missiles would be a start. Longer range through larger fuel tank. Maybe 2 WS-10 engines. Both leading and trail edge conformal radar/EW antenna that's focused on ground targets.

The force multiplier potential missions for H-20 are so broad that specifying their UAV control capability is probably too limited.

This article (link now broken) describes it well.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I copied the relevant details, on my first ever article I wrote for the diplomat back in 2018:
-“Almost as good as a special electronic combat aircraft in electronic combat capability”
-The mounting of high powered radar, high powered microwave, and laser and infrared equipment to effect and destroy missiles and other air to ground targets
-Large capacity data fusion and transmission, which aligns with the PLA’s overall understanding of informationized warfare
-Acting as a C4ISR node and “interacting” with a large number of platforms such as UAVs, AEW&C, and reconnaissance aircraft to share information and target data.