Re: Jh-7 thread
It is possible that the H-6M can carry two more YJ-83s inside the bomb bay, allowing for a total of six. Another is that it has better range, can carry more equipment, and does appear to be more comfortable for longer flights.
I am not sure if the PLAAF JH-7As are assigned to carry AshMs. I think not. These are probably meant for ground strikes, mainly with LGBs and ARM attacks against radar and SAM installations.
I am also not clear of the functions of the H-6H with YJ-63 on PLAAF service. I supposed that the PLAAF H-6H are primarily to strike at high value ground targets with YJ-63 cruise missiles, but it's hard to say if they don't have secondary antiship roles intended to use YJ-62.
Formally the PLAAF is not assigned to do antishipping. That is PLANAF's sphere of responsibility. But the lines are starting to blur when PLANAF planes also conduct bomb strikes, or strikes using ARMs. For that matter, it's not clear if the Su-30MK2s are just antiship alone or if they are also assigned for ground strikes. There appears to be greater coordination between PLAAF and PLANAF, in such a way that PLANAF begins to appear more like a PLAAF's arm rather than the PLAN's. PLANAF's current general is formerly PLAAF.
Strictly without covering the grey areas, or potential PLAAF units with antiship capability, I would put YJ-83 support to be around 3 regiments of JH-7 and JH-7A, 1 H-6M regiment, possibly about 2 or 3 H-6D regiments status unknown if converted to H-6M with YJ-83 or H-6H with YJ-62. H-6Ds are the planes that use the Kracken aka C-601/YJ-61. This is similar to the Silkworm or Seersucker but uses a turbojet instead of a rocket motor, doubling its effective range.
Q-5s experimentation to carry YJ-81 don't seem to be successful, so I wonder what exactly Q-5s are doing with the PLANAF like the 5th Division in Qingdao, as bomb and rocket strikes are not that effective against warships, unless they're purpose is to attack ports.
It is possible that the H-6M can carry two more YJ-83s inside the bomb bay, allowing for a total of six. Another is that it has better range, can carry more equipment, and does appear to be more comfortable for longer flights.
I am not sure if the PLAAF JH-7As are assigned to carry AshMs. I think not. These are probably meant for ground strikes, mainly with LGBs and ARM attacks against radar and SAM installations.
I am also not clear of the functions of the H-6H with YJ-63 on PLAAF service. I supposed that the PLAAF H-6H are primarily to strike at high value ground targets with YJ-63 cruise missiles, but it's hard to say if they don't have secondary antiship roles intended to use YJ-62.
Formally the PLAAF is not assigned to do antishipping. That is PLANAF's sphere of responsibility. But the lines are starting to blur when PLANAF planes also conduct bomb strikes, or strikes using ARMs. For that matter, it's not clear if the Su-30MK2s are just antiship alone or if they are also assigned for ground strikes. There appears to be greater coordination between PLAAF and PLANAF, in such a way that PLANAF begins to appear more like a PLAAF's arm rather than the PLAN's. PLANAF's current general is formerly PLAAF.
Strictly without covering the grey areas, or potential PLAAF units with antiship capability, I would put YJ-83 support to be around 3 regiments of JH-7 and JH-7A, 1 H-6M regiment, possibly about 2 or 3 H-6D regiments status unknown if converted to H-6M with YJ-83 or H-6H with YJ-62. H-6Ds are the planes that use the Kracken aka C-601/YJ-61. This is similar to the Silkworm or Seersucker but uses a turbojet instead of a rocket motor, doubling its effective range.
Q-5s experimentation to carry YJ-81 don't seem to be successful, so I wonder what exactly Q-5s are doing with the PLANAF like the 5th Division in Qingdao, as bomb and rocket strikes are not that effective against warships, unless they're purpose is to attack ports.
