PLAAF JH-XX / H-X bomber project


eprash

Junior Member
Registered Member
The B21 uses a F135 derived engine. You can't compare that with the engines China has available right now.
The F135 has 128 kN dry thrust. Compare that with the numbers we have been discussing above like 77 kN.
That is why the H-20 should have four engines.
Thrust won't be an issue if push comes to shove China can import NK32 or NK25 as interim solution even J20 used Russian engine at first more over the aircraft is expected to enter service in 2025 that's a lot of time look at where China's engine industry 5 years ago and the progress made until now critical techs have already been learned, it's quite doable
 

latenlazy

Colonel
Thrust won't be an issue if push comes to shove China can import NK32 or NK25 as interim solution even J20 used Russian engine at first more over the aircraft is expected to enter service in 2025 that's a lot of time look at where China's engine industry 5 years ago and the progress made until now critical techs have already been learned, it's quite doable
The issue is not thrust but fuel efficiency. Different planes need engines with different optimizations.
 

eprash

Junior Member
Registered Member
The issue is not thrust but fuel efficiency. Different planes need engines with different optimizations.
PAKDA is expected to use engine derived from NK 32, It can be done there are options and time and money is on China's side
 

Atomicfrog

Junior Member
Registered Member
PAKDA is expected to use engine derived from NK 32, It can be done there are options and time and money is on China's side
WS-18 could have been a thing... they could use the same engine than H-6 at this rate, the D-30KP-2 at 117kn is not that bad for the job, known quantity and probably reliable as a rock.
 

silentlurker

Junior Member
Registered Member
It really depends on what the minimum capability mission PLAAF has in mind for H-20.

Is its mission going to be striking around 2nd island chain? An ineffecient interim engine might be fine.

Do they need a bomber to launch ALCMs against naval bases in California? Probably going to need something better than WS-10.
 

Bltizo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
D is a dead ringer to Xi Yazhou's "elongated flying wing with stubby wings and vertical stabilizer" theory.

I understand there's some enthusiasm about speculating what kind of configuration H-20 may be -- but we're in 2021 now and the configuration of H-20 is as good as confirmed.
Unless something new comes up from someone credible, there's really no reason to keep bringing up alternative configuration as if it is still a reasonable question to ask.

As for that particular image is obviously just illustrations of various generic bomber configurations that were shown as part of whatever paper it was in:
a - subsonic, non-stealthy, configuration reminiscent of B-52 or other subsonic bombers of the era
b - supersonic, non stealthy, seems to be variable geometry taking after B-1/Tu-160
c - subsonic, stealthy flying wing, obviously takes after B-2
d - supersonic, stealthy, just a notional configuration

Obviously none of them are depicted to scale with each other either.


If you're going to depict or develop a higher speed, stealthy bomber aircraft, chances are it will be some sort of elongated delta wing aircraft with or without some sort of slight cranked wing, with or without some kind of small tails.

I wouldn't read too much into it.


If the PLA is pursuing a higher speed stealth bomber to complement H-20, we will hear about it in time.
 
Last edited:

Top