H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions

The engine change alone should have reduced fuel consumption by 28% increasing range by that same amount.

The weight savings impact on range is harder to estimate yes. We neither know the exact number nor we have a way to reliably estimate it.
I gave the 20% weight reduction number because that is bandied around in general in the industry but I think it should be considered as an upper limit to be honest. And yes the fuel tanks might have been enlarged. For example the nose in the H-6K no longer has the navigator position on it either. I doubt all that space is used with radar.

Me again with an update ... first I noticed, that the list is indeed for the new variant, but a lot in comparison to the old Tu-16 cannot be correct.

I add a comparative chart mostly based on Wiki, , and other minor posts including one Chinese magazine (see cut-out). Any corrections are welcome.

No comments? ... no idea or estimates on range and combat radius?

@Bltizo

Deino said:

No comments? ... no idea or estimates on range and combat radius?

@Bltizo

Click to expand...

I think 3000km has often been cited and we use it as an "assumed figure" but it's always been more of a gut feeling.

Bltizo said:

I think 3000km has often been cited and we use it as an "assumed figure" but it's always been more of a gut feeling.

Click to expand...

As combat radius? ... and as a rule of thumb this would equal what overall range?

Deino said:

As combat radius? ... and as a rule of thumb this would equal what overall range?

Click to expand...

Yes, combat radius.

Well if it's range, you'd probably double it and add a small amount to it as combat radius usually assumes some kind of loiter/mission duration.

But like I said, I would prefer to not give a number in the first place. Anywhere over 3000km and under 4000km sounds plausible to me.

Bltizo said:

Yes, combat radius.

Well if it's range, you'd probably double it and add a small amount to it as combat radius usually assumes some kind of loiter/mission duration.

But like I said, I would prefer to not give a number in the first place. Anywhere over 3000km and under 4000km sounds plausible to me.

Click to expand...

Thanks ... but that's exactly the point. Even the old H-6 is sometimes claimes - as the Tu-16 - to have a range of 6000 km. As such how could a more modern bomber with a refined, most likely due to CFK and other modern materials lighter airframe and less thirsty engines + eventually more fuel have less range?

Most of the data makes no sense

H-6J #9031:



#9041:

is it worthwhile to redesign H6 around WS20?

Jono said:

is it worthwhile to redesign H6 around WS20?

Click to expand...

Good question. H6 can be equipped with WS-20. Its speed may be slower because WS-20 has larger bypass ratio.

Both Y-20 and H-6 have been using D30-KP-2 engines. The WS-18 is intended as potential replacement of D30 for both aircraft. However, I think right now the Y-20 and YU-20 are prioritized for WS-20.