H-6 Bomber Aircraft Discussions


Totoro

Captain
VIP Professional
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

h-6m has a terrain following system? that's news to me. But... why? It's got zero stealth, it's not terribly manouverable, its engines are made to be most efficient at high speed-high altitude runs not to mention it doesn't have that much thrust to begin with, i would guess its speed at sea level is rather pitiful. Using h6 for any kind of low level strikes against an enemy with working AD network would be suicide. Even at high altitude it's forced to use stand off weapons, and at sea level those ranges would drop to at least half of their original value.

On another note, just how many of the old h6s have been turned into missile carriers? Anyone?
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

h-6m has a terrain following system? that's news to me. But... why? It's got zero stealth, it's not terribly manouverable, its engines are made to be most efficient at high speed-high altitude runs not to mention it doesn't have that much thrust to begin with, i would guess its speed at sea level is rather pitiful. Using h6 for any kind of low level strikes against an enemy with working AD network would be suicide. Even at high altitude it's forced to use stand off weapons, and at sea level those ranges would drop to at least half of their original value.
On another note, just how many of the old h6s have been turned into missile carriers? Anyone?
My guess is:
1. To use it over Chinese or other friendly territory (or ocean) so the enemy long range radars won't detect it prior to the launching of its also low-flying cruise missiles.
2. Probably most really old been converted to tankers, ELINT & other support roles. A missile carrier must be in top shape and sustain high mission capable rate, for obvious reasons!
 

renmin

Junior Member
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

The Badgers are good enough for a bomber. Most bombers the size of Badgers and aove these days are used only for carpet bombing and LACM deliveries, neither of which requires much on performance or protection.

What's the point? There is a production line anyway. The only thing I think they should do is replace the engine and add pylons. All else is fine. Not like it will go far either, I don't think there is a fighter that has the range to protect it.
Carpet bombing is a thing of the past. Not many use that technique anymore. As long as the H-6 can fire cruise missiles, it will still prove reliable. Better and more powerful ALCMs plus the H-6 is still effective (as long as you have a good escort;) ).
 
Last edited:

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

Based on the differences of unit numbers, there appears to be three PLAAF H-6H regiments, these ones using the YJ-63 missile, and one PLANAF H-6M regiment, this one using air launched YJ-83s or possibly YJ-62. There is probably another two or three H-6D regiments that launch the C-601/YJ-61, which still has a range of 180-200km.

The role of low altitude interdictors are not with H-6s but with JH-7s and Q-5s. The Tu-16 by design was intended as a high subsonic speed, high altitude bomber.
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

The Tu-16 by design was intended as a high subsonic speed, high altitude bomber.
The B-1 was initialy designed as high altitude supersonic strategic bomber, but later was modified for low altitude penetrating conventional bombing missions.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The H-6 can fly low on reduced engine power just like regular passenger jets do during landings & after takeoffs before reaching their cruise altitudes.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Red_CCF

New Member
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

I doubt that PLAAF would keep its H-6 bomber fleet. They would probably remain in operation until more advanced bombers are introduced. The current upgrade H-6 can still project some power especialily regarding defense of coastline with their cruise missiles. Also, missiles will probably playa bigger role than bomers in the future. H-6 is obsolete compared to western bombers and would probably have little effect in future warfare.
 
Last edited:

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
I doubt that PLAAF would keep its H-6 bomber fleet. They would probably remain in operation until more advanced bombers are introduced. The current upgrade H-6 can still project some power especialily regarding defense of coastline with their cruise missiles. Also, missiles will probably playa bigger role than bomers in the future. H-6 is obsolete compared to western bombers and would probably have little effect in future warfare.
They just restarted production of new H-6s.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With fighter escorts, it can be used for many roles by both PLAAF & PLAN. The Russians used it until 1993, well after the advent of missiles.
A closer review of the PLAAF’s long-range bombing force intentions is necessary if only to gain a better understanding of the PLA’s post-Taiwan plans for beyond-theater power projection—if any. For example, a new long-range strike aircraft would be needed if Beijing were to attempt to equip the PLA to be able to contest control out to the "Second Island Chain." Some H-6 bombers reportedly will be modified to launch long-range LACMs and more airframes are being converted for support missions.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The PLAAF has a few H-6 bombers assigned in the Guangzhou Military Region that were refitted as tankers in the 1990s. The tankers currently work with the J-8D fighter from units in the Guangzhou and Nanjing Military Regions. During April 2005, one of the tankers refueled some J-8Ds from the Nanjing Military Region over East China Sea. [8] This was the first time the PLAAF’s tankers conducted refueling over water.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

How about M-4 / Mya-4 / 3M
Myasishchev 'Bison'?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

They could also be used in the space program
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I think the Russians will sooner sell them to the PLAAF than Tu-22s!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

maozedong

Banned Idiot
Re: Question regarding the future of the H-6 bomber

I read the magazine that says china would design a long range bomber H-8 in 1996,but they cancelled the project in 1998 and have another new project instead.
the another new project is to research stealthy bomber,so many sorces from chinese magazines report that the stealthy bomer looks like copy US B-2,I am not sure these sorces is true or not.
as BLUEJACKET said H-6 is progressed to LACMs,H-6m.
one opion is the long range bomber like Tu-22 is old times,because it is no capable of strike the block from the enemy airdefence tody.
russia try to use Su34 instead of these bombers,I just doubt china will buy these bombers like Tu-22.
 
Last edited:

Top