Its just a fan-art, well, and in this case, it is not even count as an "art", it is basically a distorted B-2 pic.
And yes, flywing can be super-sonic, althrough I doubt China will go with supersonic flywing design for the reasons I stated earlier.
H-20 bomber (with H-X, JH-XX)
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Its just a fan-art, well, and in this case, it is not even count as an "art", it is basically a distorted B-2 pic.
And yes, flywing can be super-sonic, althrough I doubt China will go with supersonic flywing design for the reasons I stated earlier.
Are you referring to the characteristics of the bomber?
If so, I think its safe to say that the PLAAF definitely wants a stealth, flying wing platform similar to the B-2 and that it must at least be able to strike the Second Island Chain.
There are some very good speculations regarding the LRS-B aka B-21
Now, assuming that
1. US range requirements (i.e. US asia bases->chinese interior) are the same as Chinas range requirements (i.e. chinese interior->US asia bases),
2. The WS-15 has similar dry thrust and efficency as the F-135,
3. Chinas acquisition program is also driven by costs and the need to build a large number of bombers,
Both the H-X and the B-21 could end up with very similar specs: A two-engine flying wing, ~35,000 lbs payload, 50-55 tons empty, 120-125 tons MTOW, minimum 2000 nmi range, but probably in the 3000 nmi range range.
Of course, if one of these assumptions is wrong, we could end up with a massively different a/c. But I think its one of the best guesses one can make.
Now, assuming that
1. US range requirements (i.e. US asia bases->chinese interior) are the same as Chinas range requirements (i.e. chinese interior->US asia bases),
2. The WS-15 has similar dry thrust and efficency as the F-135,
3. Chinas acquisition program is also driven by costs and the need to build a large number of bombers,
Both the H-X and the B-21 could end up with very similar specs: A two-engine flying wing, ~35,000 lbs payload, 50-55 tons empty, 120-125 tons MTOW, minimum 2000 nmi range, but probably in the 3000 nmi range range.
Of course, if one of these assumptions is wrong, we could end up with a massively different a/c. But I think its one of the best guesses one can make.
Agree but more heavy about 150 tons and surely not only 2000 mn, 3000 or close.
150 tons MTOW is too heavy with F-135 class engines. And doubt that WS-15 will surpass the dry thrust of the F-135.
2000 nmi (= 2300 mi = 3700km) is enough to hit Guam from the chinese interior. This is therefore the absolute minum required. For the B-21, estimates actually put it between 2400 and 4800 nmi. However, WS-15 is likely less efficent than the F-135, and therefore the H-X will likely have a smaller range than the B-21 (assuming my assumptions above are true). The 2000nmi minimum still stands nevertheless.
EDIT: I want to point out that these are purely estimates about the specs of the H-X, and should in no way be seen as a speculation about a war between the nations.
2000 nmi (= 2300 mi = 3700km) is enough to hit Guam from the chinese interior. This is therefore the absolute minum required. For the B-21, estimates actually put it between 2400 and 4800 nmi. However, WS-15 is likely less efficent than the F-135, and therefore the H-X will likely have a smaller range than the B-21 (assuming my assumptions above are true). The 2000nmi minimum still stands nevertheless.
EDIT: I want to point out that these are purely estimates about the specs of the H-X, and should in no way be seen as a speculation about a war between the nations.
And I must add that if they can develop something even close in performance to B-2, then that would probably be the greatest leap in Chinese aviation since the successful development of J-10 (maybe even greater). Think about it, they are going from a modernized version of Tu-16 to something that's even better than Tu-160 in one generation. Even if we are generous and say that H-6K is close in performance to Tu-95, that would be a humongous leap.
Experience and know-how is something invaluable that cant be rushed. China obviously cant compete with the worlds best bomber manufacturers on its first or even second try.
However, bomber development is not a straight line where you need to go from high altitude subsonic (where china is now with the H-6K, and the US and Russia were in the 50's) to high altitude supersonic to low altitude supersonic to stealth without skipping a step. Rather each step has its own technological challenges and solutions and its entirely possible to build a plane on step 4, even if you cant compete on step 3.
Stealth is a disruptive technology. Its really hard to build a stealth bomber, but if you are able to do it, it doesnt matter that you lack "supersonic bomber technology", because even a mediocre stealth bomber is much better than a good supersonic one. And I think with the J-20 and J-31 I think we can agree that China at least has the stealth part down.
Therefore I think its useless to compare the H-X to legacy non-stealth aircraft. Its much better to compare it to existing stealth bomber programs, namely the B-2 and speculated LRS-B.
All of this is also purely limited to the airframe and to a certain extend subsonic engines. Avionics for example are a completely different topic.
However, bomber development is not a straight line where you need to go from high altitude subsonic (where china is now with the H-6K, and the US and Russia were in the 50's) to high altitude supersonic to low altitude supersonic to stealth without skipping a step. Rather each step has its own technological challenges and solutions and its entirely possible to build a plane on step 4, even if you cant compete on step 3.
Stealth is a disruptive technology. Its really hard to build a stealth bomber, but if you are able to do it, it doesnt matter that you lack "supersonic bomber technology", because even a mediocre stealth bomber is much better than a good supersonic one. And I think with the J-20 and J-31 I think we can agree that China at least has the stealth part down.
Therefore I think its useless to compare the H-X to legacy non-stealth aircraft. Its much better to compare it to existing stealth bomber programs, namely the B-2 and speculated LRS-B.
All of this is also purely limited to the airframe and to a certain extend subsonic engines. Avionics for example are a completely different topic.
You envisage an bomber similar to B-21 but nobody ever says they do it, can be a B-2 for size, 170 t, or close with 4 engines ... only a fact for envisaged a size the potential target is Hawai to 8000 km from Anjin : about 5000 for Bombers + 3000 for a new LACM for these range they need a Bomber which do minimum 150 t ...