TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
First point, At the moment there doesn’t seem to be a drive to Blue whale or Z-X.
Z10, Z20 are still very new the latest Z8 and Z18 are as well. Because the PLA has just introduced them into inventory. It seems unlikely that we will see a sudden hard drive to replace them. Practicality and Conservative seem the drivers of PLA R&D they don’t seem the type to suddenly hang random hard turns. Even when they do they are still conservative.
Rather the drive now is to build up there numbers. Improve the existing models and technologies establish a good fleet then move when they have the basics down.
The US FVL program is done today because the US has the luxury of an established very capable fleet of system. FARA and FLRAA are the next step in that but would start out replacing decades old AH64,AH1,H60,H1 and filling the premature demises of OH58D. They build of established technologies and ideas. Part of the US driver for Tiltrotor and FVL tech is as a reaction to the Chinese drives in Sea denial of the SCS and Western pac. To try and get the ability to rapidly reenforce allied forces in the Island chains in the event of push to shove.
The PLA doesn’t have the same speed and range issues by geography and technology positioning. IE they can float across most of their potential conflict zones win a landing craft from home. It’s the difference between Global and Regional.
For them if they were to want to try and push a counter FVL capacity the next logical step would be (well yes the engine issue as in getting better engines into widespread issue, Then) rotary wing refueling. Extending the ranges of there helicopters so as to enable vertical infiltration from stand off when faced with anti ship missile systems and the like. That would extend ASW capacity in a Naval chopper if partnered with a low speed tanker like the KC130J.
Second point.
A10 and Su25 are frankly sitting in a mission role that is obsolete. Most CAS missions today and in future conflicts as well as in the recent past have not been done by A10 but F16 and FA18. A10 was designed based on the assumption of the Cold War gap conflict. That is that the Soviets would have flooded into Germany in the tens of thousands with cheap T55 tanks. These would swarm western forces who would engage in hit and run tactics to draw the Soviets back deny them build up and harass them until they could be cut off. The A10 was designed to swoop in and kill a as many T55 as possible before they were swatted by Air defense systems.
The Soviets from the other side saw it similarly that in the event of war they would be faced with trying to push deeper into Western Europe getting cut off and and sniped by western tanks at every hill. They wanted to build an aircraft that could take western tanks deep inside western lines before it was swatted by western Air defense systems.
So what’s wrong with that you ask? Once Composite armor MBT emerged, the 30 mm guns weren’t tank busting anymore the rockets weren’t that great and the missile load isn’t that impressive. Improved mobile missile systems easily spot and swat these giant mosquitoes before they can bite. Finally Multirole fighter systems with modern ATGM and multi kill tank buster munitions emerged.
Basically a F16C with an CBU97 can disable a mechanized regiment from high altitude then turn and burn.
So then A10... SU25 where do they fit? They kinda don’t. What they ended up doing is Close close Air support against infantry but even then the 20mm gun is more than enough and A10/SU25 isn’t that much more effective than a fighter. Where they fall to next is COIN. COunter INsurgency where in vs a fast mover they can loiter longer and don’t burn as much fuel. But those aren’t unique advantages as most turboprop flight trainers can do the job. Drones with substantially lower payload can also do similar missions.
This is also why you don’t see newer platforms built like A10, Su25 or Q5.
Attack Helicopters fill a slightly different place they can support troops by being part of the manouver element. They can stay with the troops can land and take off can also lay in ambush. They can also operate in extreme shifts of ground terrain like natural and artificial (cities) canyons.
In the US the MH6 and FARA are targeted to the later as well as scouting. They can place troops on the streets because of their smaller footprint as transport or bring firepower into cull de sacs. Attack choppers similarly like to hunt scouting and attacking with smaller load outs.
Point Three. The Blue Whale is a whale of a yarn and short term isn’t needed and long term might not be needed.
The US had concepts like blue whale to replace C130 but they didn’t go anywhere. The Chinese and Russians have a chopper that sits in a similar payload class to the Bluewhale, the Mi26 Halo. The Problem with the 20 ton class chopper is what do you use it for?
Infantry okay but then again any large heavy lift chopper can carry them. Look at CH47.
Vehicles? Again same as Infantry.
Armored vehicles? Not really they will either be to heavy for the lifter, or to large both demanding either second lifters to carry extra parts and assembly on site or just won’t fit. Alternatively they are often to light to actually offer more than token protection against anything bigger than an assault rifle.
So what do they do? Cargo freight primarily. But you can do that from a C130, KC390, AN12, Y9 either air drop or Short strip landings.
To get that really practical point it has to be even bigger A400M class. But the engineering on that favors a STOL fixed wing between Y9 and Y20.
So where does blue whale fit? It’s fine if you want a CH47 class lifter maybe even a little bigger something in the C27J class with higher speed but beyond that it’s just to expensive for to little outcome.
Z10, Z20 are still very new the latest Z8 and Z18 are as well. Because the PLA has just introduced them into inventory. It seems unlikely that we will see a sudden hard drive to replace them. Practicality and Conservative seem the drivers of PLA R&D they don’t seem the type to suddenly hang random hard turns. Even when they do they are still conservative.
Rather the drive now is to build up there numbers. Improve the existing models and technologies establish a good fleet then move when they have the basics down.
The US FVL program is done today because the US has the luxury of an established very capable fleet of system. FARA and FLRAA are the next step in that but would start out replacing decades old AH64,AH1,H60,H1 and filling the premature demises of OH58D. They build of established technologies and ideas. Part of the US driver for Tiltrotor and FVL tech is as a reaction to the Chinese drives in Sea denial of the SCS and Western pac. To try and get the ability to rapidly reenforce allied forces in the Island chains in the event of push to shove.
The PLA doesn’t have the same speed and range issues by geography and technology positioning. IE they can float across most of their potential conflict zones win a landing craft from home. It’s the difference between Global and Regional.
For them if they were to want to try and push a counter FVL capacity the next logical step would be (well yes the engine issue as in getting better engines into widespread issue, Then) rotary wing refueling. Extending the ranges of there helicopters so as to enable vertical infiltration from stand off when faced with anti ship missile systems and the like. That would extend ASW capacity in a Naval chopper if partnered with a low speed tanker like the KC130J.
Second point.
A10 and Su25 are frankly sitting in a mission role that is obsolete. Most CAS missions today and in future conflicts as well as in the recent past have not been done by A10 but F16 and FA18. A10 was designed based on the assumption of the Cold War gap conflict. That is that the Soviets would have flooded into Germany in the tens of thousands with cheap T55 tanks. These would swarm western forces who would engage in hit and run tactics to draw the Soviets back deny them build up and harass them until they could be cut off. The A10 was designed to swoop in and kill a as many T55 as possible before they were swatted by Air defense systems.
The Soviets from the other side saw it similarly that in the event of war they would be faced with trying to push deeper into Western Europe getting cut off and and sniped by western tanks at every hill. They wanted to build an aircraft that could take western tanks deep inside western lines before it was swatted by western Air defense systems.
So what’s wrong with that you ask? Once Composite armor MBT emerged, the 30 mm guns weren’t tank busting anymore the rockets weren’t that great and the missile load isn’t that impressive. Improved mobile missile systems easily spot and swat these giant mosquitoes before they can bite. Finally Multirole fighter systems with modern ATGM and multi kill tank buster munitions emerged.
Basically a F16C with an CBU97 can disable a mechanized regiment from high altitude then turn and burn.
So then A10... SU25 where do they fit? They kinda don’t. What they ended up doing is Close close Air support against infantry but even then the 20mm gun is more than enough and A10/SU25 isn’t that much more effective than a fighter. Where they fall to next is COIN. COunter INsurgency where in vs a fast mover they can loiter longer and don’t burn as much fuel. But those aren’t unique advantages as most turboprop flight trainers can do the job. Drones with substantially lower payload can also do similar missions.
This is also why you don’t see newer platforms built like A10, Su25 or Q5.
Attack Helicopters fill a slightly different place they can support troops by being part of the manouver element. They can stay with the troops can land and take off can also lay in ambush. They can also operate in extreme shifts of ground terrain like natural and artificial (cities) canyons.
In the US the MH6 and FARA are targeted to the later as well as scouting. They can place troops on the streets because of their smaller footprint as transport or bring firepower into cull de sacs. Attack choppers similarly like to hunt scouting and attacking with smaller load outs.
Point Three. The Blue Whale is a whale of a yarn and short term isn’t needed and long term might not be needed.
The US had concepts like blue whale to replace C130 but they didn’t go anywhere. The Chinese and Russians have a chopper that sits in a similar payload class to the Bluewhale, the Mi26 Halo. The Problem with the 20 ton class chopper is what do you use it for?
Infantry okay but then again any large heavy lift chopper can carry them. Look at CH47.
Vehicles? Again same as Infantry.
Armored vehicles? Not really they will either be to heavy for the lifter, or to large both demanding either second lifters to carry extra parts and assembly on site or just won’t fit. Alternatively they are often to light to actually offer more than token protection against anything bigger than an assault rifle.
So what do they do? Cargo freight primarily. But you can do that from a C130, KC390, AN12, Y9 either air drop or Short strip landings.
To get that really practical point it has to be even bigger A400M class. But the engineering on that favors a STOL fixed wing between Y9 and Y20.
So where does blue whale fit? It’s fine if you want a CH47 class lifter maybe even a little bigger something in the C27J class with higher speed but beyond that it’s just to expensive for to little outcome.
