# China's New Stealth Bomber: H-X / H-20



## cirr

_*The model airplanes that could one day change the global balance of power. *_

BY JOHN REED | JUNE 11, 2013







Is This China's New Design for a Stealth Bomber? - An FP Slideshow | Foreign Policy





A crude mockup of the structural design for what could be China's first stealth bomber.





A front view of the structural model for the possible Chinese stealth bomber design.





Another front view of the possible model for a Chinese stealth bomber design.





A front view of a blueprint-style drawing for a Chinese stealth bomber. 





The top view of a blueprint-style drawingt for a possible Chinese stealth bomber design. Notice how the wings shown in these sketches are shorter than those shown in the photos of the model. 





An artist's rendering of the bottom view of what might be a Chinese stealth bomber. Notice the difference in the wings and rear half of the airplane shown in these drawings versus those shown in the blueprint-style images. The model shown earlier has the longer wings shown in the drawing above but the rear fuselage depicted in the blueprints-like sketches. The tail of the model is slightly different than is depicted either set of drawings. 





A side and top-view of the artist's rendering of what might be China's design for a stealth bomber.


You're looking at what some people are speculating is China's design for a stealth bomber. It may look like a simple model right now. *But these Chinese models have a habit of turning into working airplanes.* And if that happens in this case, watch out. Because it could potential give these Chinese the ability to penetrate deep, deep into enemy territory without the opponents ever knowing what hit them. 

Remember, designs very similar to China's J-31 stealth fighter and its Li Jian stealthy-ish drone appeared as trade show models only two years before full-size versions of the planes were revealed in the past year. 

The latest plane resembles a cross between Russia's PAK DA stealth bomber design, it's T-50 PAK FA stealth fighter and Northrop's YF-23 Black Widow -- the stealth jet that lost the contest to be the world's first fifth-generation fighter to Lockheed Martin's YF-22 Raptor. (The cockpit also resembles this fictional monstrosity.) 

What could such a plane be used for? It would likely serve as a penetrating bomber designed to keep an enemy far from China's shores by sneaking past enemy radar and attacking enemy bases and ships with cruise missiles. Some have speculated that China's J-20, which is huge for a fighter, was meant to fulfill this role; similar to a stealthy version of the F-111 Aardvark or F-15E Strike Eagle. However, we're seeing the J-20 conducting flight tests with air-to-air missiles; a possible indication that it may be a high-speed interceptor -- similar to the Soviet Union's giant MiG-25 Foxbat and MiG-31 Foxhound interceptors -- designed to steak out and shoot down approaching bombers. 

Chinese Web forums claim the new stealth bomber might have a length of 91-feet and a wingspan of 72-feet. This is smaller than all of the U.S. and Russia's strategic bombers such as the B-1 Lancer or Tu-22M but slightly larger than the U.S.'s F-15E Strike Eagle tactical bomber. The jet is also rumored to have an operational radius of just under 2000-miles. 

It should be pointed out that earlier rumors about China investing in a fleet of Russian-designed Tu-22M supersonic bombers were reportedly untrue. Rather than field the supersonic jets, China is developing a new version of its H-6 bomber -- which is based on the Soviet Tu-16 Badger that was designed in the 1950s and retired by Russia in the early 1990s. 

Chinese military officials have even said that buying a 1970s-design like the Tu-22M makes little sense given the fact that U.S. radars could spot the planes coming from a long way off. This could be taken as a hint that the PLA navy or air force recognizes the need for a stealthy-bomber capable of keeping adversaries at bay. 

It costs a ton of money and time to develop and field an effective bomber force. It's not just the cost of building and buying stealth planes. The Chinese will need to develop an entire support network of maintenance crews, basing infrastructure capable of handling the planes, a large aerial tanker fleet to refuel them and perhaps most importantly, learn how to effectively use them. 

One interesting thing to note about the design shown above is that its engine exhaust outlets appear to be square -- a stealthier design than the traditional round nozzles seen on China's current version of stealthy planes. This could be a sign that China is making progress in the extremely challenging art of jet engine design. This could also be an indication that it will be a long time before China gets the technological knowhow to develop this aircraft. Current reports indicate that China has a long way to go when it comes to engine-making. 

Still, the image above might just be a model. Even if real, it will take a long time to produce an fleet of potent bombers. 

"The internet really likes airframe models and drawings," Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at the aviation consulting firm Teal Group tells us. "The real world doesn't think too much of them. Coming up with concept illustrations is vastly different from building and testing a design, let alone putting it into production. But most of all the aerospace world is increasingly concerned with what's beneath the surface of a plane. Even if China did produce this aircraft, if it had to use Chinese engines and systems, and was integrated with their current level of technology, I'm not sure it would mean very much. It's all a bit of a stretch, for the next few decades at least." 

Here's what Aboulafia told us in January when discussing the Tu-22M story about China's need for modern bombers. 


"It would make sense, given China's strategy and power-projection ambitions, but one thing to consider is that building a long range bomber/maritime strike fleet isn't a standalone development," Aboulafia tells Killer Apps. "The up-front costs in terms of training, doctrine, and general fleet bed-down are very large. Even larger is the cost of support aircraft, particularly tankers, that would be useful, if not essential, in making these new bombers effective." 

Such investments may be too much for a Chinese military that is buying a number of other, newer weapons systems that range from stealth fighters to anti satellite and cyber weapons. 

"Unless the Chinese military budget grows at a near-breakneck pace, a development like this would likely impact other equipment procurement and systems development priorities, including ones that are less conventional and more asymmetric," said Aboulafia. 

Even if China manages to get a bomber airborne in the next few years, it will be a while before it has an effective combat fleet. Still, Beijing isn't afraid of embarking on complex strategic weapons programs. The most notable of these being its fleet of aircraft carriers; another expensive strategic weapon system that takes lots of time and money to develop (even with stolen designs), maintain and figure out how to use effectively.

Reactions: Like Like:
14 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## BDforever

the yellow one is similar to Russian Tu-160 supersonic bomber

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hurt

its only a model made by a student

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## cirr

Two things need be borne in mind&#65306;

&#65288;1&#65289;Yes&#65292;China is working on a stealthy tactical bomber&#65292;the prototype of which is expected in 1-2&#65292;3 max&#65292;years&#12290;
&#65288;2&#65289;Yes&#65292;China has started on the initial works for a B2 type of wing-shaped stealthy strategic bomber&#65292;the arrival of which needs more time than the above does&#12290;

The rest is&#65292;as the Chinese would habitually say these days&#65292;floating clouds&#12290;


----------



## BDforever

cirr said:


> Two things need be borne in mind&#65306;
> 
> &#65288;1&#65289;Yes&#65292;China is working on a stealthy tactical bomber&#65292;the prototype of which is expected in 1-2&#65292;3 max&#65292;years&#12290;
> &#65288;2&#65289;Yes&#65292;China has started on the initial works for a B2 type of wing-shaped stealthy strategic bomber&#65292;the arrival of which needs more time than the above does&#12290;
> 
> The rest is&#65292;as the Chinese would habitually say these days&#65292;floating clouds&#12290;



will china sell those bomber to Pakistan and Bangladesh ?


----------



## jhungary

To be honest, I never even see why China would develop a Strategic Bomber, tactical bomber maybe, but I honestly do not see why China will need long range Strategic bomber in this stage of the air force progress.

Strategic bomber have 1 sole purpose only, that is to bomb a target that far away from you. Except that maybe you want to start a nuclear war with bomber, but we hardly do this anymore as we now got the ICBM.

So, by building a stealth strategic bomber fleet, Chinese Military are declaring an intention of bombing inter-continental strategic target, which does not make sense, especially after the Chinese are very keen on making their 2nd Arty corp. sharper.

However, when you come down and look at Chinese enemy list, almost all her enemy are near or even neighbour to China, then why would you need a Strategic bomber to begin with.

And if the bomber intended target is the United States, which mean a total thermonuclear war, then China again, don't need those bomber

So, is this a warning that China will now starting to **** off small country far away from China like the US now or it's just they **** their money off to something that do not have much of a use again??

If China are to build a air transport fleet or auxiliary air fleet, I would understand, but building a Strategic bomber at this stage, I don't really understand why

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beerbal

BDforever said:


> will china sell those bomber to Pakistan and Bangladesh ?






yes yes , why not... But what will u do with these bombers??? Planning to invade USA?? @Topic: Bombers are outdated concept. that why USA and Russia are not investing in it. USA is operating 60s design (B52) and few B2s...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakPrinciples

The very first picture is actually a design for the "Next Generation Bomber" proposed by Boeing and Lockheed so that isn't it.

Next-Generation Bomber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is interesting is that the yellow mock up in the following series of pictures actually bears a striking resemblance to the "Long-Range Strike-B" which was superseded by the "Next Generation Bomber design"






I think the last one is the most likely candidate to be the future bomber design.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## jhungary

Beerbal said:


> yes yes , why not... But what will u do with these bombers??? Planning to invade USA?? @Topic: Bombers are outdated concept. that why USA and Russia are not investing in it. USA is operating 60s design (B52) and few B2s...



Bomber work up to a point you have total reliance of the sky.

Today battlefield does not spell that anymore, you can of course use a stealth bomber and strike in the heart of enemy risking the bomber or the crew or both, or you can use drone and take over the business.

Drone can never replace fighter, but drone can be more than capable replace bomber in this day and ages.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

"&#38738;&#24180;&#23398;&#29983;&#31185;&#25216;&#20316;&#21697;&#20114;&#21160;&#23637;&#21306;" in the pic ... young studnet's model airplane


----------



## IND151

BDforever said:


> will china sell those bomber to Pakistan and Bangladesh ?



Off-coarse not. No nation will sell strategic stealth bomber to even its closest ally.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr

SinoSoldier said:


> Do you know when the 2nd batch of J-15s (will it be equipped with AESA?) be built?



Why don't you ask me about the rapid progress that is being made regarding stealth strategic bomber H-XX？

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

cirr said:


> Why don't you ask me about the rapid progress that is being made regarding stealth strategic bomber H-XX？



Ok I will ask you. What is the progress on the stealth strategic bomber?


----------



## Sasquatch

Bussard Ramjet said:


> Ok I will ask you. What is the progress on the stealth strategic bomber?



XAC is making full progress on it after the Y-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aliaselin

Hu Songshan said:


> XAC is making full progress on it after the Y-20.


At least one has rolled out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

aliaselin said:


> At least one has rolled out.




The bomber ??? ... I don't think so ... at least the latest info says manufacturing for individual parts of the prototype has just begun. Otherwise I would like to know what's Your source ?

Deino


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

Hu Songshan said:


> XAC is making full progress on it after the Y-20.



Can you elaborate? What is XAC? How much long will it take to get the thing operational?


----------



## Sasquatch

Bussard Ramjet said:


> Can you elaborate? What is XAC? How much long will it take to get the thing operational?



Builder Company, operational time unknown.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

Hu Songshan said:


> Builder Company, operational time unknown.



Some specifications of the bomber? I have heard so many different kind of designs, some subsonic, some supersonic, some only partially stealth.


----------



## aliaselin

Deino said:


> The bomber ??? ... I don't think so ... at least the latest info says manufacturing for individual parts of the prototype has just begun. Otherwise I would like to know what's Your source ?
> 
> Deino


What is the latest information you are talking about?


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> Why don't you ask me about the rapid progress that is being made regarding stealth strategic bomber H-XX？



Alrighty, what is the progress of the H-XX?



aliaselin said:


> At least one has rolled out.



What source?


----------



## cnleio

SinoSoldier said:


> Alrighty, what is the progress of the H-XX?
> 
> What source?


China stealth bomber project ... rumor said 1st prototype soon to out, whatever before 2020.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

cnleio said:


> China stealth bomber project ... rumor said 1st prototype soon to out, whatever before 2020.
> View attachment 226914
> View attachment 226915



Where did you hear of this rumor?


----------



## cnleio

SinoSoldier said:


> Where did you hear of this rumor?


Military forum ... leaked information always come from these forums first, but i just said rumor not official source.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

cnleio said:


> China stealth bomber project ... rumor said 1st prototype soon to out, whatever before 2020.
> View attachment 226914
> View attachment 226915



Are you sure, this is the design, as displayed in this pic?



cnleio said:


> Military forum ... leaked information always come from these forums first, but i just said rumor not official source.



Are you trying to say that it will be operational by 2020?


----------



## cnleio

Bussard Ramjet said:


> Are you sure, this is the design, as displayed in this pic?


Not 100% sure, but China developing a Red B-2 it's a truth.



Bussard Ramjet said:


> Are you trying to say that it will be operational by 2020?


Just prototype out


----------



## Akasa

cnleio said:


> Military forum ... leaked information always come from these forums first, but i just said rumor not official source.



Was the 2020 date your opinion?


----------



## cnleio

SinoSoldier said:


> Was the 2020 date your opinion?


Come on, i just say what the rumor i heard ... not offcial source,so just for reference. I wanna stop the discussion of H-XX stealth bomber here, future when 1st prototype come out let's continue ... won't be long.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

cnleio said:


> Come on, i just say what the rumor i heard ... not offcial source,so just for reference. I wanna stop the discussion of H-XX stealth bomber here, future when 1st prototype come out let's continue ... won't be long.



When is the prototype coming out?



cnleio said:


> Just prototype out



Means, you are saying that by 2020 the first prototype will be out?


----------



## cnleio

Bussard Ramjet said:


> When is the prototype coming out?
> 
> 
> 
> Means, you are saying that by 2020 the first prototype will be out?


Maybe before 2020 1st prototype out, buddy ! Just rumor said, not me.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

cnleio said:


> Maybe before 2020 1st prototype out, buddy ! Just rumor said, not me.




Okay, Isn't that a bit slow? I have been hearing about this project for so long, and thought that 1st prototype was going to be out soon.


----------



## Akasa

Bussard Ramjet said:


> Okay, Isn't that a bit slow? I have been hearing about this project for so long, and thought that 1st prototype was going to be out soon.



As I understand it, the prototype is currently under construction but has not reached assembly stage quite yet.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

SinoSoldier said:


> As I understand it, the prototype is currently under construction but has not reached assembly stage quite yet.



So when will it reach. 2020? To Assemble? It will be operational by 2030 then, and the US would have already moved on to all kind of different planes. It is planning SR72, at a speed of Mach7 and the capability for space flight.


----------



## Deino

I moved all the H-X bomber-related post to this old tread ... besides that the very first image posted is surely not China's new stealth bomber but a proposal from Northrop for the NGB.

So please continue here ....


----------



## Akasa

Bussard Ramjet said:


> So when will it reach. 2020? To Assemble? It will be operational by 2030 then, and the US would have already moved on to all kind of different planes. It is planning SR72, at a speed of Mach7 and the capability for space flight.



If aircraft assembly timelines are anything to go by, it would be a couple of years at the latest.


----------



## Obambam

Bussard Ramjet said:


> So when will it reach. 2020? To Assemble? It will be operational by 2030 then, and the US would have already moved on to all kind of different planes. It is planning SR72, at a speed of Mach7 and the capability for space flight.



We are not here to race with the US. Everyone knows the US has a sizeable lead, but this does not stop nor will it slow down our 'self improvement' process. We will move forward regardless of what the US is doing and, vice versa. 
If I were you, I'd be worrying about India instead of where China stands in 10-20 years time. 
Truthfully speaking, India will lag behind even more, if money is used to buy foreign weapon systems instead of injecting it into your own research and development.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beidou2020

Obambam said:


> We are not here to race with the US. Everyone knows the US has a sizeable lead, but this does not stop nor will it slow down our 'self improvement' process. We will move forward regardless of what the US is doing and, vice versa.
> If I were you, I'd be worrying about India instead of where China stands in 10-20 years time.
> Truthfully speaking, India will lag behind even more, if money is used to buy foreign weapon systems instead of injecting it into your own research and development.



India military don't even know what stealth even means. They have to beg Russia to teach them what it means. 

Indian military is 30-40 years behind China overall.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tiqiu

On Sept.1 at the PLAAF Aviation University in Changchun, the PLAAF Chief Gen Ma Xiaotian officially confirmed for the first time that China is working on developing a new long-range strategic bomber: “We are now developing a new generation of long-range bomber, and you will see it in the future.”

Ever since it has been a hot topic in military forums as what this new bomber may look like. There are many CG images suggesting it might be a flying wing aircraft like the US B-2, or the Russian Tu-160 type of variable-geometry wing aircraft.

Given there are news confirming that the Chinese high-bypass turbofan WS-20 with a thrust of 180KN has already entered production phase(http://tv.cctv.com/lm/jqsjd/),so the engine powering the new bomber is no longer the hurdle for China. 4 WS-20 engine can easily power H-20 carrying a 20-to-30t payload and having a range of over 10000 km. Considering the goings of J-20/J-31 and Y-20, maybe we can expect to see this bird much sooner than thought.

As to the other unknown whether the design of H-20 will follow the B-2’s subsonic&stealth path or the Tu-160’s supersonic but non-stealth path, one well-known Chinese military expert has given his thoughts on this CCTV program ( http://tv.cctv.com/2016/12/04/VIDEHqSu3htp8FjE3D6Gfkcr161204.shtml). He said China would adopt a new approach taken into consideration of all the pros and cons of the US and Russian long-range bombers, and the costs factor.

I guess this is what is normally referred as a “second mover advantage”. Perhaps China can come up with a new approach that H-20 will fly in subsonic speed with some degree of stealth when cursing at low altitude and fly supersonic in high altitude when penetrating the enemy’s airspace. This way the costs of this new bird maybe relatively cheaper than that of B-2.

I am eager to see some real images, even in nono-sized, of the H-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## royalharris

J20,Y20,H20,the next generation plaaf backbone!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

royalharris said:


> J20,Y20,H20,the next generation plaaf backbone!


And Z-20 too. Lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## royalharris

Beast said:


> And Z-20 too. Lol.


Forget it

Wish H20 join plaaf early.our USA friends have flied their B2 many times to china sky. it is very impolite without return visit.with H20,we can also from time to time pay a return visit of our friends USA's sky.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

royalharris said:


> Forget it
> 
> Wish H20 join plaaf early.our USA friends have flied their B2 many times to china sky. it is very impolite without return visit.with H20,we can also from time to time pay a return visit of our friends USA's sky.




Any proof for that ??? As far as I know, the USAF never flew any of their B-2 into Chinese airspace.


----------



## gambit

Deino said:


> *Any proof for that ???* As far as I know, the USAF never flew any of their B-2 into Chinese airspace.


That is how badass the B-2. No proof at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tiqiu

Deino said:


> Any proof for that ??? As far as I know, the USAF never flew any of their B-2 into Chinese airspace.


I think he meant U-2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Viking 63

congrats China !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SR-91

gambit said:


> That is how badass the B-2. No proof at all.




Looks like they got their hands on American black projects blue prints...


----------



## grey boy 2



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## cirr

Tick tock, tick tock......

Still I am a fan of suborbital space bomber. Pls don't let me wait too long.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Tiqiu

cirr said:


> Tick tock, tick tock......
> 
> Still I am a fan of suborbital space bomber. Pls don't let me wait too long.


One guy said some type of real images can be seen just after the Chinese New Year.


grey boy 2 said:


>


I think the first picture of your post is actually implying something. According to the same guy, Haerbin Institute of Technology(哈工大) has already developed the common strategic rotary launcher for the new beast. It carries more varieties of ammunition than the US/Russians.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## cirr

Deino said:


> Any proof for that ??? As far as I know, the USAF never flew any of their B-2 into Chinese airspace.



"Slightly" off-topic

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTg0ODQ3MDY2MA==.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## terranMarine

SR-91 said:


> Looks like they got their hands on American black projects blue prints...


Better believe it, Chinese B2 will appear sooner than you might think. It's already in the advanced stage of development

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

SR-91 said:


> Looks like they got their hands on American black projects blue prints...


All jokes aside...If we did penetrated the PLA's air defense network, we would not publicize it, and if the Chinese somehow found out that we could, they would not publicize it unless they can actually do something drastic like shoot at and down a B-2.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## terranMarine

gambit said:


> All jokes aside...If we did penetrated the PLA's air defense network, we would not publicize it, and if the Chinese somehow found out that we could, they would not publicize it unless they can actually do something drastic like shoot at and down a B-2.


I think you are trying to create the image that the B-2 already penetrated China's - Russia's air defenses by flying from left to right, back and forth but ofcourse the US would never mention a thing about it.  And if China once has our B-2 you will have us believe US already can counter the B-2 so no Chinese B-2 will ever penetrate US air defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## gambit

terranMarine said:


> I think you are trying to create the image that the B-2 already penetrated China's - Russia's air defenses by flying from left to right, back and forth but ofcourse the US would never mention a thing about it.  *And if China once has our B-2 you will have us believe US already can counter the B-2 so no Chinese B-2 will ever penetrate US air defense.*


I said it before and will repeat: We defeated 'stealth'.

I do not expect you, and the rest of this forum, to believe it. I said it out of generosity, really, I do. I do not know the details of how, but I do know the general principles of how. But even if do know those details, I would not say that I do know anyway. Just like the J-20 and the PAK-FA, your version of the B-2 is DOA, even from conception.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pepsi Cola

gambit said:


> I said it before and will repeat: We defeated 'stealth'.
> 
> I do not expect you, and the rest of this forum, to believe it. I said it out of generosity, really, I do. I do not know the details of how, but I do know the general principles of how. But even if do know those details, I would not say that I do know anyway. Just like the J-20 and the PAK-FA, your version of the B-2 is DOA, even from conception.


anyone can defeat stealth, it's not invisibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Okarus said:


> anyone can defeat stealth, it's not invisibility.


First...We never said that 'stealth' equals to being invisible. The correct phrase is 'low radar observability', meaning the body can be seen, just very difficult and at very close distance.

Second...If it is that easy to detect a 'low radar obsersable' body, then China and Russia would not be scrambling to work on their own 'stealth' fighters.

Finally...When I said that the US 'defeated stealth', I mean that we have technical methods to render that 'low' into 'high'. So if any adversary do not have comparable methods, our 'stealth' aircrafts will give US a combat edge. So the other guy is screwed either way.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tiqiu

gambit said:


> First...We never said that 'stealth' equals to being invisible. The correct phrase is 'low radar observability', meaning the body can be seen, just very difficult and at very close distance.
> 
> Second...If it is that easy to detect a 'low radar obsersable' body, then China and Russia would not be scrambling to work on their own 'stealth' fighters.
> 
> Finally...When I said that the US 'defeated stealth', I mean that we have technical methods to render that 'low' into 'high'. So if any adversary do not have comparable methods, our 'stealth' aircrafts will give US a combat edge. So the other guy is screwed either way.


That is fair analysis.
As stated at the beginning, maybe the H-20 is not going fully to adopt the F-2's approach; it may concentrate less on stealth but more on supersonic speed capabilities,like the CG image below. That is why many are eager to see its real image,which should reveal which path it takes.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Pepsi Cola

gambit said:


> First...We never said that 'stealth' equals to being invisible. The correct phrase is 'low radar observability', meaning the body can be seen, just very difficult and at very close distance.
> 
> Second...If it is that easy to detect a 'low radar obsersable' body, then China and Russia would not be scrambling to work on their own 'stealth' fighters.
> 
> Finally...When I said that the US 'defeated stealth', I mean that we have technical methods to render that 'low' into 'high'. So if any adversary do not have comparable methods, our 'stealth' aircrafts will give US a combat edge. So the other guy is screwed either way.


It just make the detection distance shorter that's all. Plus just because both J20 and F22 or whatever are both stealth aircrafts don't mean they are meant to do the same missions. J20 probably just meant to shoot down enemy tankers and AWACS and not meant to fly over enemy's land. And rightly so, since the enemy is sure to be able to detect it. Same thing with F22. The days of controlling enemy's airspace with stealth aircrafts are over

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AlyxMS

'Murican: We'll build F-35 stealth fighters so we can be ahead of everyone else.

*China builds stealth fighters
*Russia builds stealth fighters

'Murican: Stealth is useless for us, but not for them. So we are still ahead of everyone else.



China Stronk: J-20 does not use AL-31. Although all the evidence looks like it does, I can feel that it isn't.

*Some people actually believed it, some did not.

China Stronk: I'm not expecting you Chinese naysayers who does not understand Chinese to believe it, but I'm Chinese so I know it's not AL-31.

*'Murican observes

'Murican: We have penetrated China air defense with B-2, although there is no evidence to support it, I can feel we did.

*Wishing people would believe
*No one believes 'Murican's BS

'Murican: I'm not expecting you PDF Chinese are educated enough to believe it, but I'm saying we did.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gambit

Okarus said:


> It just make the detection distance shorter *that's all.*


That casual dismissal is what will get you killed.

In a war, you want to detect and engage the enemy from as far away from your controlled territory as possible. Controlled territory could range from home soil to swaths of land/sea that you took from someone else, including the enemy's home soil.

This is why 'stealth' irreversibly changed air combat because now the 'stealth' attacker has a higher threat quotient than other forms of attack due to that decreased distance, and decreased distance produces:

- Decreased response time
- Increased posture stress

For the second item, what it means is that the threat from a 'stealth' attacker, unknown as to when and where, demands a constant heightened alert posture which puts additional stress on everything, from humans to machines. Over time, the stress will wear down the defenders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pepsi Cola

gambit said:


> That casual dismissal is what will get you killed.
> 
> In a war, you want to detect and engage the enemy from as far away from your controlled territory as possible. Controlled territory could range from home soil to swaths of land/sea that you took from someone else, including the enemy's home soil.
> 
> This is why 'stealth' irreversibly changed air combat because now the 'stealth' attacker has a higher threat quotient than other forms of attack due to that decreased distance, and decreased distance produces:
> 
> - Decreased response time
> - Increased posture stress
> 
> For the second item, what it means is that the threat from a 'stealth' attacker, unknown as to when and where, demands a constant heightened alert posture which puts additional stress on everything, from humans to machines. Over time, the stress will wear down the defenders.


I was trying to be short and concise. Wasn't trying to spark another argument. I'm an military enthusiast, not a radar officer.


----------



## teddy

Tiqiu said:


> That is fair analysis.
> As stated at the beginning, maybe the H-20 is not going fully to adopt the F-2's approach; it may concentrate less on stealth but more on supersonic speed capabilities,like the CG image below. That is why many are eager to see its real image,which should reveal which path it takes.
> View attachment 358077


This is more like a supersonic version F117, can't be a bomber exactly. More likely an attacker.

I believe H20 is a Chinese version B2, it is not high tech stuff already, using 20 ago technology. B2 is piece of crap, China should be able to make their own version.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bloo

Any video?
Would like to see it in action.


----------



## teddy

This document shows a b2 like airplane, but it is not. Coz the wingtip's angel is different from B2. It means it is not a study of Americans B2, but actually a Chinese version stealth bomber!!
It has an extended wings, means it may be able to fly higher than B2. Of course, a slower speed in return.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yusheng



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## yusheng



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

teddy said:


> This is more like a supersonic version F117, can't be a bomber exactly. More likely an attacker.
> 
> I believe H20 is a Chinese version B2, it is not high tech stuff already, using 20 ago technology. B2 is piece of crap, China should be able to make their own version.



Indeed, the H-20 will be at least as good as the B3 which is still on the paper.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Tiqiu

There were talks back in 2007 that China had a long-range bomber development namely H-8, which used 4 WS-10A engines. It was reported that the H-8 uses a high-tech blended wing-body design, has fly-by-wire controls, and has an angled fuselage. The wing has massive internal fuel tanks. The aircraft uses carbon fiber and other composite materials and the weapons bay has a rotating weapons profile.The bomber retains a terrain hugging capacity and has a terrain following and mapping radar, satellite data links and advanced digital mapping systems. The bomber also uses advanced stealth technologies including nanometer coating amongst other technologies.

Since all those sub-set technologies described above are already mustered by China, plus now China has more powerful engines FWS10b/15/20, so I guess people should not be surprised if this H-20 suddenly shows up.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## SR-91

gambit said:


> All jokes aside...If we did penetrated the PLA's air defense network, we would not publicize it, and if the Chinese somehow found out that we could, they would not publicize it unless they can actually do something drastic like shoot at and down a B-2.



Do you think they have something that can shoot down B-2?



gambit said:


> I said it before and will repeat: We defeated 'stealth'.
> 
> I do not expect you, and the rest of this forum, to believe it. I said it out of generosity, really, I do. I do not know the details of how, but I do know the general principles of how. But even if do know those details, I would not say that I do know anyway. Just like the J-20 and the PAK-FA, your version of the B-2 is DOA, even from conception.






Using ground weapons or in-air weapons?


----------



## gambit

SR-91 said:


> Do you think they have something that can shoot down B-2?


Any missile can bring down the B-2. The problem is detection in the first place.



SR-91 said:


> Using ground weapons or in-air weapons?


Anything available. The bottom line is detection and in that regard, Chinese and Russian 'stealth' are DOA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

yusheng said:


> View attachment 358276
> View attachment 358277
> View attachment 358278
> View attachment 358279
> View attachment 358280
> View attachment 358281
> View attachment 358282
> View attachment 358283





yusheng said:


> View attachment 358284


plz translate ....at least main points


----------



## Deino

yusheng said:


> View attachment 358276
> View attachment 358277
> View attachment 358278
> View attachment 358279
> View attachment 358280
> View attachment 358281
> View attachment 358282
> View attachment 358283




Come on guys ... can we at least try to avoid pure fan-art postings !??? They are in no way helpful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yusheng

why not, this is forum , not somewhere for science paper, 
fan art is helpful too,

when 10 years ago the first picture of J20 appeared, people said same as you say now here today.
this is really not helpful.



HRK said:


> plz translate ....at least main points



A kind of design, the range of 6000 km, with high supersonic cruise missile, which range is 3000 km;
The plane parameters shown on the pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Globenim

SR-91 said:


> Using ground weapons or in-air weapons?



No, eternally vague Vietnamese plumber "physics" from self appointed expert college dropouts pretending they understand even half of the shit they parrot from Wiki and Google articles, when they fail to grasp even the concept of the term array and think repetitively parotting redundant long technical terms they stumbled over on Google like certain angles or other terms that are already obvious from context or the first time you used your cool "techy" term, makes them sound more like a real "expert" rather than those phony actors that never make it past the first job interview.

Jokes aside, there is no point in asking specifics about obscure claims of omnipotent sparkling unicorn powered "secret technologies" the claimant "can't/won't talk about because its super secret/you wouldn't understand". If there where anything to substantiate you'd already have heard about it. Its just infantil and boils down to pure rethoric to bring up something like that in first place.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SR-91

gambit said:


> Any missile can bring down the B-2. The problem is detection in the first place.
> 
> 
> Anything available. The bottom line is detection and in that regard, Chinese and Russian 'stealth' are DOA.



Chinese have our F-35 stealth tech, RAM coating technology and much more, how successful are they in implementing and incorporating that onto their jets?


----------



## terranMarine

SR-91 said:


> Chinese have our F-35 stealth tech, RAM coating technology and much more, how successful are they in implementing and incorporating that onto their jets?


It does not matter, the man already said it the US has defeated "stealth", Chinese-Russian stealth planes are DOA

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SR-91

terranMarine said:


> It does not matter, the man already said it the US has defeated "stealth", Chinese-Russian stealth planes are DOA



DOA has been established for Chinese aircrafts when they are going against The USA. I understood that, my question was, how successful were they in Incorporating that compared to How much of the tech they took?
@gambit


----------



## slng

what type of answer you expecting?

it is like asking 'i knew you stole the program code from your colleague, but how good are in programming to reverse-engineer it and reimplement it in your own way'

why dont we just focus on more data digged out from fellow chinese here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

SR-91 said:


> DOA has been established for Chinese aircrafts when they are going against The USA. I understood that, my question was, how successful were they in Incorporating that compared to How much of the tech they took?
> @gambit


We do not know. Not unless everyone -- and I mean *EVERYONE* -- submit their 'stealth' jets for neutral third party testing.

I know how difficult it is to detect and track a clean F-16 at BVR distances. I have seen the radar scope myself of that situation. So we can use the clean F-16 as baseline. No ground clutter necessary. Just a clean F-16 at 10 angels.

That is not going to happen. Not even in our great grandchildren's lifetime.

The other way is thru real combat. You think the Chinese is going to allow the J-20 to play at Red Flag ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## +4vsgorillas-Apebane

gambit said:


> We do not know. Not unless everyone -- and I mean *EVERYONE* -- submit their 'stealth' jets for neutral third party testing.
> 
> I know how difficult it is to detect and track a clean F-16 at BVR distances. I have seen the radar scope myself of that situation. So we can use the clean F-16 as baseline. No ground clutter necessary. Just a clean F-16 at 10 angels.
> 
> That is not going to happen. *Not even in our great grandchildren's lifetime.*
> 
> The other way is thru real combat. You think the Chinese is going to allow the J-20 to play at Red Flag ?



Ha, you probably have grand children already so great grand children wont even be that far off. 

How time flies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fanna4paf2

The Science and Technology Daily of China published an article titled Conjecture on China’s Strategic Bomber Performance on December 4, saying that China’s Air Force Commander Ma Xiaotian revealed that China is developing next-generation long-range bombers at an open day activity on September 1, confirming the “legendary” “H-20” bomber.

Recently, a China Central Television (CCTV) program also showed a suspected CG graph of China’s H-20 bomber, which further made a big splash among military fans.

When asked when China’s next-generation strategic bombers will make the debut, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo, director of the PLA Navy’s Expert Consultation Committee, said that we should have some patience.

China has never developed such a large-tonnage and long-range strategic bomber before. The H-6 bomber in service is medium-sized but not a strategic bomber. Having the strategic bomber will become one of the symbols of China’s air force as a strategic service, said Yin Zhuo.

Yin Zhuo also held that the strategic bombers that China is developing will be surely on a par with B-2 of the US and have the stealth performance.

Yin introduced that the next-generation strategic bombers need a longer development cycle, usually more than ten years. China boasts some favorable conditions for developing strategic bombers: China has accumulated some experience from the development of J-20 and F -31 stealth fighters, so the material and design is not a big problem. China has developed Y-20, C-919 and other large aircraft, so the relevant technical reserves are useful for developing strategic bombers.

Cruise missiles, nuclear weapons and other weapons and equipment that will be carried by domestic strategic bombers are all in place, so it is just in time for China to develop strategic bombers, said Yin Zhuo. Leveraging the rich technical reserves, the development cycle may be shorter.

Speaking of whether China can develop supersonic stealth strategic bombers, military expert Li Li said that this is technically demanding indeed. Because if the emphasis is laid on the stealth performance, the aircraft’s aerodynamic configuration will be quite different from that of a supersonic bomber. It may be a more realistic solution to select from the stealth capability and supersonic penetration.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## fanna4paf2




----------



## Deino

Hmmm ... ??


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/830349579979677696



> 中国の次世代爆撃機は高速開発段階に入られた模様、なお計画名は「新型遠距離作戦飛行機（新型远程作战飞机）」らしい。





> It seems that the next generation bomber of China has entered the high-speed development stage, the plan name seems to be "a new type distance operation aircraft (new type remote control planes)".




Deino


----------



## MarcsPakistan

Maybe after 2030 .It will be conducting its first flight


----------



## MultaniGuy

Good development for China


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> Hmmm ... ??
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/830349579979677696
> Deino



A remote control? Is it a drone / UAV?


----------



## Deino

Brainsucker said:


> A remote control? Is it a drone / UAV?




I think this term "remote control" only appears in the English--translation of the original Japanese post. Since my Japanese is in fact as good as my Chinese  I think that this term is only a result of the online translation.

Does anyone where the original rumour comes from ?

Deino


----------



## randomradio

cnleio said:


> View attachment 226914



It looks so unhappy.

@jhungary A bomber isn't just about long range, it's about payload as well. And the long range allows multiple approach vectors to a target.


----------



## 52051

Brainsucker said:


> A remote control? Is it a drone / UAV?



Well, the japanese words in the article simply says, word for word: "new type long range combat aircraft" (I know that because thats part of Japanese is exactly the same as Chinese), I dont know why the translator translate that into "new type remote control planes".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

randomradio said:


> It looks so unhappy.
> 
> @jhungary A bomber isn't just about long range, it's about payload as well. And the long range allows multiple approach vectors to a target.



wow, who resurrected a 3 years old thread. I don't actually remember what I said.

H-X is a stragetic bomber, its sole purpose is to reach out to the enemy you cannot touch with conventional way, Payload is not important to Strategic bomber, it was heavily armed to compensate long flight time, long flight time equal to less sortie.

China do not have enemy that stretch across the an ocean, the furthest one is Japan, which China can touch its asset with tradition Tactical bomber like Q-5 for JH-7, with the induction of other Multirole platform, such as J-10, J-15 and Su-30, basically they could have cover most tactical and strategic target. in their potential enemy such as Taiwan and Japan. They don't need a strategic bomber. Which will draw resource to escort and flying CAP and Ironhand mission where they don't need.


----------



## Akasa

jhungary said:


> wow, who resurrected a 3 years old thread. I don't actually remember what I said.
> 
> H-X is a stragetic bomber, its sole purpose is to reach out to the enemy you cannot touch with conventional way, Payload is not important to Strategic bomber, it was heavily armed to compensate long flight time, long flight time equal to less sortie.
> 
> China do not have enemy that stretch across the an ocean, the furthest one is Japan, which China can touch its asset with tradition Tactical bomber like Q-5 for JH-7, with the induction of other Multirole platform, such as J-10, J-15 and Su-30, basically they could have cover most tactical and strategic target. in their potential enemy such as Taiwan and Japan. They don't need a strategic bomber. Which will draw resource to escort and flying CAP and Ironhand mission where they don't need.



A strategic bomber confers more loitering time & geographic flexibility for any given mission, even if one isn't needed to reach the opponent's territory. You are assuming that in the case of a regional conflict, the PLAAF/PLAN would have unhindered access to airfields & tanks across the theater of operations, which is quite unrealistic and hence necessitates the need for a long-range strike aircraft that is survivable against the gamut of Japanese/Taiwanese air defense networks. Having a VLO bomber also alleviates the need for constant SEAD/CAP missions to increase its survivability.


----------



## jhungary

SinoSoldier said:


> A strategic bomber confers more loitering time & geographic flexibility for any given mission, even if one isn't needed to reach the opponent's territory. You are assuming that in the case of a regional conflict, the PLAAF/PLAN would have unhindered access to airfields & tanks across the theater of operations, which is quite unrealistic and hence necessitates the need for a long-range strike aircraft that is survivable against the gamut of Japanese/Taiwanese air defense networks. Having a VLO bomber also alleviates the need for constant SEAD/CAP missions to increase its survivability.



The problem is, what you are assuming is that China can achieve at least Local Air Superiority (Even tho to use strategic bomber in any sort of sortie, you probably will need Air Domimance) for the strategic bomber to make sense. However, in reality, China can probably provide a local air superiority for these Strategic Bomber to operate, but that would have taken a lot of coastal asset for that to happen, and we are only talking about Chinese Coastal enemies, such as Taiwan and Japan. If we are talking about Target that would have an ocean across (Such as Guam, Hawaii or Indonesia), these bomber would be useless becasue there are no fighter escort and the PLAAF cannot contest Air Superiority once it out of PLAAF operational range.

For China, the best way to deal with Taiwan and Japan is to launch Tactical Sorties to first neutralize Taiwanese and Japanese Air Power, much like the Israeli did during 6 days war, then using its full strength of its Air Force to provide complete CAS role to the ground force or naval force. Getting a few bomber here and there will not change the strategic picture of presumed war in Japan and Taiwan. Firstly, Japan and Taiwan are too close for China to have missile to deal with Strategic Target, second, it won't mademuch of a different unless you start bombing Population Center. There aren't too many Strategic Target in those country to begin with.

So, basically, to support this argument, you are saying China need these bomber to go after close target, which close enough to be able to touch with Cruise Missile fire from both PLAN and PLAAF and Ballistic missile by the second arty corps, and only to be use within the range of PLAAF operational range, which is first Island chain. That's not logical if you ask me.


----------



## Akasa

jhungary said:


> The problem is, what you are assuming is that China can achieve at least Local Air Superiority (Even tho to use strategic bomber in any sort of sortie, you probably will need Air Domimance) for the strategic bomber to make sense. However, in reality, China can probably provide a local air superiority for these Strategic Bomber to operate, but that would have taken a lot of coastal asset for that to happen, and we are only talking about Chinese Coastal enemies, such as Taiwan and Japan. If we are talking about Target that would have an ocean across (Such as Guam, Hawaii or Indonesia), these bomber would be useless becasue there are no fighter escort and the PLAAF cannot contest Air Superiority once it out of PLAAF operational range.
> 
> For China, the best way to deal with Taiwan and Japan is to launch Tactical Sorties to first neutralize Taiwanese and Japanese Air Power, much like the Israeli did during 6 days war, then using its full strength of its Air Force to provide complete CAS role to the ground force or naval force. Getting a few bomber here and there will not change the strategic picture of presumed war in Japan and Taiwan. Firstly, Japan and Taiwan are too close for China to have missile to deal with Strategic Target, second, it won't mademuch of a different unless you start bombing Population Center. There aren't too many Strategic Target in those country to begin with.
> 
> So, basically, to support this argument, you are saying China need these bomber to go after close target, which close enough to be able to touch with Cruise Missile fire from both PLAN and PLAAF and Ballistic missile by the second arty corps, and only to be use within the range of PLAAF operational range, which is first Island chain. That's not logical if you ask me.



The general doctrine around the B-2 and similar future bombers is that they are more survivable as an independent unit than their fighter counterparts (and I would argue cruise missiles as well). With a single B-2 you do not need additional fighter escort or ground-based SAM coverage, which frees up those assets to conduct other important operations. This means that stealth bomber aircraft would be useful in striking very-high-value targets (think of what the F-117s did during the Gulf War) without forcing the military to commit a much larger fighter/bomber contingent.

Therefore, I'm not discounting the importance of conventional fighter & attack aircraft or ballistic/cruise missiles in the eventuality of a Taiwan/Japan conflict but highlighting the significant tactical flexibility and "punch" a bomber like the B-2 brings to a conflagration. If a country has a weapon that allows for strikes deep into enemy territory, that itself has the potential to become a game changer.


----------



## jhungary

SinoSoldier said:


> The general doctrine around the B-2 and similar future bombers is that they are more survivable as an independent unit than their fighter counterparts (and I would argue cruise missiles as well). With a single B-2 you do not need additional fighter escort or ground-based SAM coverage, which frees up those assets to conduct other important operations. This means that stealth bomber aircraft would be useful in striking very-high-value targets (think of what the F-117s did during the Gulf War) without forcing the military to commit a much larger fighter/bomber contingent.
> 
> Therefore, I'm not discounting the importance of conventional fighter & attack aircraft or ballistic/cruise missiles in the eventuality of a Taiwan/Japan conflict but highlighting the significant tactical flexibility and "punch" a bomber like the B-2 brings to a conflagration. *If a country has a weapon that allows for strikes deep into enemy territory*, that itself has the potential to become a game changer.



The problem is, B-2 is not even being used by the US at that level. That's why we only have 22 B-2 to begin with, not because they are hyperexpensive, but simply we do not believe it worth that much to be able to make it a game changer.

The problem with this is, for China, this is going to multiple if China start fielding these type of bomber, because 1.) PLAAF is a smaller and weaker organisation than USAF. 2.) China does not have a distant Enemy that warrant such a strike.

What you are saying is correct, anything that can potentially deep strike an enemy could be a game changer, but for China, *EVERYTHING* they have can potentially deep strike an enemy, because their enemy is close, not like Russia to US during Cold War. You can use anything in PLAAF, PLAN and Second Artillery Corp to target and cover the whole Islands of Japan and Taiwan. Adding B-2 like bomber will not make much of an impact to enemy like this. Simply because anything, from J-10 firing cruise missile to Su-30 or J-31 can reach and perform these kind of strike. Why not focus on resource on those rather than make B-2 like bomber? And you know what? The time when China starting to field these bomber in reasonable number. There are most definitely already have a way to defeat stealth, that is the exact reason why US does not bother to make anymore than 23 B-2.

Yes, think of F-117, why not do something along the line of F-117, that I will understand, but a B-2 type? It would simply a waste of money to do that. B-2 never gave any tactical punch to the USAF, it was always (as far as I was in the Armed Force) a combination of A-10, F-15E and F-16, B-2 never contribute to this on the scale of Warhogs Strike Eagle and the Falcon.

Maybe @gambit can shred more light on how B-2 bring Tactical Edge on battlefield? Beucase as far as I saw it on the ground, it didn't.


----------



## Akasa

jhungary said:


> The problem is, B-2 is not even being used by the US at that level. That's why we only have 22 B-2 to begin with, not because they are hyperexpensive, but simply we do not believe it worth that much to be able to make it a game changer.
> 
> The problem with this is, for China, this is going to multiple if China start fielding these type of bomber, because 1.) PLAAF is a smaller and weaker organisation than USAF. 2.) China does not have a distant Enemy that warrant such a strike.
> 
> What you are saying is correct, anything that can potentially deep strike an enemy could be a game changer, but for China, *EVERYTHING* they have can potentially deep strike an enemy, because their enemy is close, not like Russia to US during Cold War. You can use anything in PLAAF, PLAN and Second Artillery Corp to target and cover the whole Islands of Japan and Taiwan. Adding B-2 like bomber will not make much of an impact to enemy like this. Simply because anything, from J-10 firing cruise missile to Su-30 or J-31 can reach and perform these kind of strike. Why not focus on resource on those rather than make B-2 like bomber? And you know what? The time when China starting to field these bomber in reasonable number. There are most definitely already have a way to defeat stealth, that is the exact reason why US does not bother to make anymore than 23 B-2.
> 
> Yes, think of F-117, why not do something along the line of F-117, that I will understand, but a B-2 type? It would simply a waste of money to do that.



Well, frankly the B-2 hasn't been used in a large-scale high-intensity conflict (besides a few pot shots in Libya & similar countries) so we don't know how exactly the USAF envisions its role, but we can use the F-117 during the Gulf War as a case study. The Nighthawk was assigned to attack & decimate Iraqi command & control installations, R&D facilities, and key infrastructure that the US thought was related to Iraq's alleged WMD program. These targets were much more heavily-defended than other targets and would've required significant quantities of military personnel & materiel to deal with. Nevertheless, the advent of the F-117 meant that these targets no longer required the aforementioned commitment to be destroyed, and hence saving the USAF a lot of financial resources, time, and equipment. In fact, the F-117 destroyed more than 31% of all neutralized Iraqi targets during the Gulf War despite accounting for only *2.5 percent* of all coalition combat aircraft. I'd imagine that the gap would be even greater with highly-sophisticated aircraft like the B-2.

Did the United States also use conventional equipment like F-15Es, cruise missiles, & CAS aircraft? Absolutely. And I'd expect any modern nation to do so in a regional conflict. But an asset like the B-2, a *force multiplier* in more ways than one, would be an enormous godsend for any military, especially one that is numerically inferior to a hypothetical opponent (back to your PLAAF vs USAF comparison). In operation, utilizing a force multiplier is essentially equivalent to having built 100+ (arbitrary number) additional 4th generation fighter/attack aircraft but with far fewer personnel being put in harm's way.

Finally, it should be mentioned that the US is developing the B-21 to replace the B-2, thus demonstrating that the brass has not taken long-range stealth bombers off the table with respect to present and near-future USAF doctrine.


----------



## jhungary

SinoSoldier said:


> Well, frankly the B-2 hasn't been used in a large-scale high-intensity conflict (besides a few pot shots in Libya & similar countries) so we don't know how exactly the USAF envisions its role, but we can use the F-117 during the Gulf War as a case study. The Nighthawk was assigned to attack & decimate Iraqi command & control installations, R&D facilities, and key infrastructure that the US thought was related to Iraq's alleged WMD program. These targets were much more heavily-defended than other targets and would've required significant quantities of military personnel & materiel to deal with. Nevertheless, the advent of the F-117 meant that these targets no longer required the aforementioned commitment to be destroyed, and hence saving the USAF a lot of financial resources, time, and equipment. In fact, the F-117 destroyed more than 31% of all neutralized Iraqi targets during the Gulf War despite accounting for only *2.5 percent* of all coalition combat aircraft. I'd imagine that the gap would be even greater with highly-sophisticated aircraft like the B-2.
> 
> Did the United States also use conventional equipment like F-15Es, cruise missiles, & CAS aircraft? Absolutely. And I'd expect any modern nation to do so in a regional conflict. But an asset like the B-2, a *force multiplier* in more ways than one, would be an enormous godsend for any military, especially one that is numerically inferior to a hypothetical opponent (back to your PLAAF vs USAF comparison). In operation, utilizing a force multiplier is essentially equivalent to having built 100+ (arbitrary number) additional 4th generation fighter/attack aircraft but with far fewer personnel being put in harm's way.
> 
> Finally, it should be mentioned that the US is developing the B-21 to replace the B-2, thus demonstrating that the brass has not taken long-range stealth bombers off the table with respect to present and near-future USAF doctrine.



First of all, you do know F-117 and B-2 have different role in war, right?

Again, I do understand the need for China to develope a F-117ish tactical stealth bomber, be that the coming FC-31 or a new concept. That's fine. The problem is that B-2 does not do what F-117 do in Desert Storm, the original envision by the USAF for B-2 is to drop nuclear weapon in stealth over Russia, to complete the 3 cycles (air, sub-subsurface, ICBM) of delievery (I forgot the name of the cycle) What B-2 do now is more or less what B-52 do during Vietnam War. Plus the ability to drop Bunker Buster Bomb.

For China, the need of B-2 type to run as a bomb truck is quite low, because, as I said, you don't need that kind of concentration of firepower in one area you need, that's the reason why there are only a few sorties of either B-52 or B-2 was ever called in Iraqi and Enduring Freedom.

For High Priority Target, (or Tier 1 target) in war, those were taken out by the Tactical bomber or tactical sorties. Which at this moment, as I type, were to be taken care by A-10, F-15E and basically any aircraft that can come in and drop a JDAM.

For China, the need of strategic bombing is not needed because all of their potential target is nearby. The need of tier 1 targetting can be done by future stealth fighter, the need of a Strategic Bomber can only be used in a low intensity conflict, which usually China outnumber their enemy.

So the only way that make sense for this Bomber is to try and bomb the United States mainland (as the only country that miltarily stronger than China) But doing that will undoubtly trigger WW3. So...That would not be anything but a white elephent for China.

For US, they need strategic bomber, one reason is, they can support them in forward deployment, they have an extensive refueling system, forward deploy base. And most importantly, they have global engagement that needed thsoe bomber because they may not have a forward support base on the next war they are fighting, the last attempt of the strategic bomber used in a strategic role is Operation Black Bucks (1-7), which the RAF uses the vulcan bomber from Acension island to bomb target in Falklands. And even that sorties are stretching the length and sserve nothing but a demostration to the RAF. For China, continue down this road would mean nothing more than a hanger queen and waste of money.


----------



## IblinI

MarcsPakistan said:


> Maybe after 2030 .It will be conducting its first flight


You will definitely seeing it in the next two years.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

After putting into use of the digital prototyping design platform. preparations have also been completed for the implementaion of the digital prototyping quality control platform（for a certain type of aricraft). 

中国航空报讯：经过春节前后一个多月的连续奋战，中航工业一飞院信息化“鹰”团队终于完成了*某型号数字样机质量控制*平台上线准备工作。数字样机质量控制平台的开发，是一飞院在飞机数字化设计方面取得的新突破。

技术创新的背后是持续不断的探索。早在“十二五”期间，一飞院就通过对国际先进数字样机体系的跟踪研究，将数字样机审查体系建设列入专业建设重点项目，并持续开展了两年多的技术研究，详细调研了各个专业的样机审查需求，结合数字样机仿真技术，完成了整个数字样机质量控制体系的策划和验证平台构建。

2016年底，在完成基础研究并进行了专业间项目合作、典型部段验证、培养先锋用户等宣贯推广工作后，一飞院在某型号样机协调会上决定，将该项技术创新成果在型号研制中推广应用，并紧急成立了项目攻关团队——“鹰”团队，要求该团队迅速建立型号数字样机质量控制平台，实现科研成果向型号应用的转化。

为此，“鹰”团队开启了“超级加班”模式，他们的2017年元旦假期几乎都是在办公室度过的。元旦之后的半个多月，团队成员每天晚上加班至深夜。经过团队成员的奋力冲刺，终于完成了平台上线前的各项工作。春节后一上班，样机审查与质量控制实施方案就在总师系统的型号讨论会上获得通过。至此，*型号工程应用平台上线准备工作全部就绪*。

*即将上线的数字样机质量控制平台，将与一飞院数字样机设计平台共同构筑起完整的数字样机“双V”研发体系*。它是数字化条件下实物质量控制与预测设计的必备手段，是质量控制程序全面落实到具体设计活动的重要保证，也是一飞院在全三维数字样机设计平台基础上取得的新的技术突破。数字样机质量控制体系的应用，将使得一飞院型号研制质量管控实现大的跨越和提升。

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## randomradio

jhungary said:


> wow, who resurrected a 3 years old thread. I don't actually remember what I said.
> 
> H-X is a stragetic bomber, its sole purpose is to reach out to the enemy you cannot touch with conventional way, Payload is not important to Strategic bomber, it was heavily armed to compensate long flight time, long flight time equal to less sortie.
> 
> China do not have enemy that stretch across the an ocean, the furthest one is Japan, which China can touch its asset with tradition Tactical bomber like Q-5 for JH-7, with the induction of other Multirole platform, such as J-10, J-15 and Su-30, basically they could have cover most tactical and strategic target. in their potential enemy such as Taiwan and Japan. They don't need a strategic bomber. Which will draw resource to escort and flying CAP and Ironhand mission where they don't need.



Sorry, I never noticed. 

Anyway, a bomber provides the ability to have multiple approach vectors, so a bomber taking off from West China can fly over to Turkmenistan or Iran and fire off missiles towards Delhi.

Similarly, a bomber from Hainan can fly over South East Asia and hit Peninsular India, which is shielded from direct attacks from North or NE India because of the integrated air defence. 

So it will force countries to spend more money on covering all its flank and dispersing resources to other areas.

Bombers also put naval fleets in danger. An Indian fleet that's to the north of Australia heading towards the Pacific is within range. It will force the navy to circle around Australia instead.


----------



## jhungary

randomradio said:


> Sorry, I never noticed.
> 
> Anyway, a bomber provides the ability to have multiple approach vectors, so a bomber taking off from West China can fly over to Turkmenistan or Iran and fire off missiles towards Delhi.
> 
> Similarly, a bomber from Hainan can fly over South East Asia and hit Peninsular India, which is shielded from direct attacks from North or NE India because of the integrated air defence.
> 
> So it will force countries to spend more money on covering all its flank and dispersing resources to other areas.
> 
> Bombers also put naval fleets in danger. An Indian fleet that's to the north of Australia heading towards the Pacific is within range. It will force the navy to circle around Australia instead.



Well, you are assuming on 2 things.

1.) The enemy do not know where you are at all times.
2.) The vectors are multi-approachable.

The first one is quite self explained. Basically, if the enemy know where you are at all times, it sort of defeat the purpose why you are going the other direction.

The second one is about how you approach a target. I have called several airstrike on target and have learn some of the basic JTAC stuff when I was doing Pathfinder School as part of my Airborne Training. What you said not quite matter in war.

The first thing is, there are something called Loitering area, or Staging Point, where your asset amassed. Where you come from and how you vector in your bomber is not a primary concern, but rather if i don't have asset on my staging point, I cannot call any airstrike.

The second thing is, you most likely only have one way to go at a target, unless you are thinking of a One way trip. What you are thinking is what will happen before the bomber go into and attack a target, what happen to afterward? After your strike, you will most likely been detected (unless your ADS crew is really that dumb) and to egress, you will need a pre-planned route. Which either the ADS on that route is light or the ADS has been supressed in that area. And since you need a specific door to get out of the target area, that mean there are only a certain angle you can come in.

Also, not to mention the multiple vectors thing can be done with Tactical Bomber with decent internal fuel bay and/or mid-air refueling, you won't need large bomber to go with a multi-vector strike.


----------



## Deino

YuChen said:


> You will definitely seeing it in the next two years.




What makes You so sure of it ??

If You compare the H-20's development with the Y-20 - which surely is less complex - then there are reports about:

- 2010 early: full-scale mock-up completed
- 2012 early: rumours that the #01 prototype under construction
- 2013: three prototypes (#01 - #03) finished with the #02 being the static test airframe.
- 2012 late: first low speed taxiing
- 2013 early: first flight

This would correspond to close 3 years from design finalisation to first sight aka taxi test. Even if we don't know how far the H-20's design is completed, but if they are indeed as noted by others like @cirr, they are probably at the stage of detailed design and 3D digital mock-up "construction"; not sure if it can be translated into "full-scale mock-up completed" !??

Anyway it does not sound as if the design has been completed and construction of a prototype begins soon, but even if it would still mean about three years from now on or about 2020.

So to assume to see that bird within two years is IMO a bit far fetched or over-optimistic.
But I would be glad if I'm wrong.

Deino


----------



## randomradio

jhungary said:


> Well, you are assuming on 2 things.
> 
> 1.) The enemy do not know where you are at all times.
> 2.) The vectors are multi-approachable.
> 
> The first one is quite self explained. Basically, if the enemy know where you are at all times, it sort of defeat the purpose why you are going the other direction.
> 
> The second one is about how you approach a target. I have called several airstrike on target and have learn some of the basic JTAC stuff when I was doing Pathfinder School as part of my Airborne Training. What you said not quite matter in war.
> 
> The first thing is, there are something called Loitering area, or Staging Point, where your asset amassed. Where you come from and how you vector in your bomber is not a primary concern, but rather if i don't have asset on my staging point, I cannot call any airstrike.



You don't need an asset at a staging point if you are using satellites to hit fixed targets.



> The second thing is, you most likely only have one way to go at a target, unless you are thinking of a One way trip. What you are thinking is what will happen before the bomber go into and attack a target, what happen to afterward? After your strike, you will most likely been detected (unless your ADS crew is really that dumb) and to egress, you will need a pre-planned route. Which either the ADS on that route is light or the ADS has been supressed in that area. And since you need a specific door to get out of the target area, that mean there are only a certain angle you can come in.



The bomber has plenty of time to leave. We are not talking about dropping LGBs, we are talking about long range cruise missiles. Both Turkmenistan and SE Asia are far from any kind of interference from fighters. The bomber would have long left the area after having fired its missiles.

It allows China to bypass our most sophisticated defences.



> Also, not to mention the multiple vectors thing can be done with Tactical Bomber with decent internal fuel bay and/or mid-air refueling, you won't need large bomber to go with a multi-vector strike.



You can't. The airspace is big. Urumqi to Turkmenistan is 2500Km, a return trip makes it 5000Km. Then you need fuel for on station, emergency, reserve etc. As mentioned earlier, a bomber is about payload as well, it should be able to fire off multiple 1000+Km cruise missiles into India.

And the very fact that the bomber is stealth allows it to fly over other countries without being intercepted anyway. A regular tactical fighter carrying all sorts of external loads cannot.

Let's not forget that its primary use is still a nuclear bomber, like the B-2.


----------



## jhungary

randomradio said:


> You don't need an asset at a staging point if you are using satellites to hit fixed targets.



You do need a staging point to "Stack" your asset, in JTAC and CCT term, you will need your target to hit quickly and smoothly, and you will need to direct your asset on target.

Traditionally, you stack with your quickest TTL asset on the lower level (below 5000 fts) and you want your higher TTL asset on higher level. If you don'thave a staging point, you would need to call your Airstrike from your base, unless your base is quit near, you will have to wait. Normally, any terminal controller will tell you to group the asset inside a staging point.



> The bomber has plenty of time to leave. We are not talking about dropping LGBs, we are talking about long range cruise missiles. Both Turkmenistan and SE Asia are far from any kind of interference from fighters. The bomber would have long left the area after having fired its missiles.
> 
> It allows China to bypass our most sophisticated defences.



A.) You don't get to choose what you want to drop. You will need to thinkof both Cruise Missile and Bombs, it's quite stupid to make a bomber just for you to drop Cruise Missile.

B.) If you are talking about Cruise Missile, then where you vector your bomber is not important, as once they are dropped, you cannot stop it from penetrating the target airspace.

C.) You don't need a strategic bomber to drop cruise missile, you can do it with any tactical bomber.

You won't be able to bypass sophisticated ADS, if this is sophisticated, which usually mean they are distributed, then where you vector your bomber in is a moot point, as you still face the same ADS. It's not like I am driving a tanks, where I can go around and hit the enemy tank on the side, you are talking about Missile Defence, which have a 360 defence circle.



> You can't. The airspace is big. Urumqi to Turkmenistan is 2500Km, a return trip makes it 5000Km. Then you need fuel for on station, emergency, reserve etc. As mentioned earlier, a bomber is about payload as well, it should be able to fire off multiple 1000+Km cruise missiles into India.
> 
> And the very fact that the bomber is stealth allows it to fly over other countries without being intercepted anyway. A regular tactical fighter carrying all sorts of external loads cannot.
> 
> Let's not forget that its primary use is still a nuclear bomber, like the B-2.



umm, no...what you said is only correct if you only have 1 Airbase service the 5000km borders, even with smaller airspace you still have room to manuver, and if the airspace is big, you can always re-route and re-vector in any sort of tactical fighter to an area. With or Without refuelling.

I don't understand what's with this Missile BS you guys seems to be hyping about. First of all, you cannot drop a 1000+ km range Cruise Missile from a stealth bomber, the reason they are stealth is because they are using internal bomb bay. When you start hanging these big 1000+ range cruise missile on the wingtip Which will defeat the purpose of Stealth Bomber (B-2 cannot load up with Cruise Missile in the internal bomb bay). Even if the Chinese bomber can load up with long range cruise missile, that won't be in any significant number anyway. And then you will need to ask yourselves, Would that be wise to risk a multi-millions bomber to deliever just a few missile? Or rather you can do it with a few cheaper tactical fighters? 

And if you are talking about Nuclear Weapon, China have no first use policy, they won't need a stealth bomber as a deliever platform, also, even if they do, it won't quite matter as that will trigger a full scale thermonuclear war, by then, it is the missile in the silo that count, not the bomber.


----------



## randomradio

jhungary said:


> You do need a staging point to "Stack" your asset, in JTAC and CCT term, you will need your target to hit quickly and smoothly, and you will need to direct your asset on target.
> 
> Traditionally, you stack with your quickest TTL asset on the lower level (below 5000 fts) and you want your higher TTL asset on higher level. If you don'thave a staging point, you would need to call your Airstrike from your base, unless your base is quit near, you will have to wait. Normally, any terminal controller will tell you to group the asset inside a staging point.



You don't need JTAC or TTL assets to hit factories, air bases etc. You punch in the coordinates into your missiles and send them out.

Cruse missiles, ballistic missiles also don't need forward controllers, you need recce aircraft and satellites.

I am referring to the military industrial hinterland in India, where most of our military stuff is made. That's cities like Pune, Bangalore, Chennai etc.



> A.) You don't get to choose what you want to drop. You will need to thinkof both Cruise Missile and Bombs, it's quite stupid to make a bomber just for you to drop Cruise Missile.



Then you won't hit our military industrial complex.

If you want to get to the mainland, you will have to stay out of reach of the navy's and the air force's tactical fighters and sea based ADS.

For China to develop a bomber alone means India will need a more sophisticated ADS for Peninsular India. So now we have to throw money on more land based and sea based defences.

You are also forgetting that China and Russia aren't friends. So it isn't just Japan and Taiwan, there's also US, Russia and India that they have to deal with.



> B.) If you are talking about Cruise Missile, then where you vector your bomber is not important, as once they are dropped, you cannot stop it from penetrating the target airspace.



Your missile needs to come within range first. That's what the bomber is for.
Hainan to Bangalore is 3500Km. Cruise missiles will have to fly over ASEAN, and their own defences will activate against such an attack, particularly Vietnam's. But if the Chinese develop a bomber that can bypass ASEAN air defences and attack Bangalore from Myanmar, which is just 1500Km away, the attack will be far more effective. And the bomber will be carrying enough missiles to put a dent.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...orld-he-can-strike-from-1-700-miles-away.html



> C.) You don't need a strategic bomber to drop cruise missile, you can do it with any tactical bomber.



A simple tactical bomber won't get close. And even if it did, its payload is too small.



> You won't be able to bypass sophisticated ADS, if this is sophisticated, which usually mean they are distributed, then where you vector your bomber in is a moot point, as you still face the same ADS. It's not like I am driving a tanks, where I can go around and hit the enemy tank on the side, you are talking about Missile Defence, which have a 360 defence circle.



Peninsular India has very poor ADS. And even if it ever did get ADS, it will not be as sophisticated or numerous as North India.



> umm, no...what you said is only correct if you only have 1 Airbase service the 5000km borders, even with smaller airspace you still have room to manuver, and if the airspace is big, you can always re-route and re-vector in any sort of tactical fighter to an area. With or Without refuelling.



You can't. We are not talking about your airspace, we are talking about operating in neutral airspace. Any other tactical fighter will be discovered, considering it can even fly to that range.

Always remember that bigger the size of the aircraft, the more stealthy it can be against radar. 



> I don't understand what's with this Missile BS you guys seems to be hyping about. First of all, you cannot drop a 1000+ km range Cruise Missile from a stealth bomber, the reason they are stealth is because they are using internal bomb bay. When you start hanging these big 1000+ range cruise missile on the wingtip Which will defeat the purpose of Stealth Bomber (B-2 cannot load up with Cruise Missile in the internal bomb bay). Even if the Chinese bomber can load up with long range cruise missile, that won't be in any significant number anyway. And then you will need to ask yourselves, Would that be wise to risk a multi-millions bomber to deliever just a few missile? Or rather you can do it with a few cheaper tactical fighters?



The B-2 won't. But the Russians and Chinese don't think that way. They want to use long range missiles on their stealth aircraft, so does India. 

Kh-55. Internal configuration. 3000Km.






Kh-101. 3000Km.





You can pack more lower ranged missiles. Please consider Russian/Chinese doctrine, not just American.

Tactical fighters can't carry long range weapons internally. And a few cheaper tactical fighters won't get close because they are going to be less sophisticated.



> And if you are talking about Nuclear Weapon, China have no first use policy, they won't need a stealth bomber as a deliever platform, also, even if they do, it won't quite matter as that will trigger a full scale thermonuclear war, by then, it is the missile in the silo that count, not the bomber.



NFU is a paper policy, it's not binding. When countries go nuclear, you think treaties matter?

A stealth bomber is made for a full scale thermonuclear war. It's not made for a short conventional war. That's why it's called a strategic bomber. The B-2 in particular was built for carrying nuclear weapons for use against the Soviet Union.

Although we have been discussing the conventional use of the bomber, the actual role of this new bomber is obviously strategic. There's no point arguing along the lines of "but they have ICBMs" because the Russians and Americans have far more ICBMs and still use stealth bombers.


----------



## Deino

*Can we stick to the topic please ?? You are more discussing certain operational considerations and specific bomber-related issues ... but not really H-XX related stuff !*

Deino


----------



## Akasa

jhungary said:


> First of all, you do know F-117 and B-2 have different role in war, right?
> 
> Again, I do understand the need for China to develope a F-117ish tactical stealth bomber, be that the coming FC-31 or a new concept. That's fine. The problem is that B-2 does not do what F-117 do in Desert Storm, the original envision by the USAF for B-2 is to drop nuclear weapon in stealth over Russia, to complete the 3 cycles (air, sub-subsurface, ICBM) of delievery (I forgot the name of the cycle) What B-2 do now is more or less what B-52 do during Vietnam War. Plus the ability to drop Bunker Buster Bomb.
> 
> For China, the need of B-2 type to run as a bomb truck is quite low, because, as I said, you don't need that kind of concentration of firepower in one area you need, that's the reason why there are only a few sorties of either B-52 or B-2 was ever called in Iraqi and Enduring Freedom.
> 
> For High Priority Target, (or Tier 1 target) in war, those were taken out by the Tactical bomber or tactical sorties. Which at this moment, as I type, were to be taken care by A-10, F-15E and basically any aircraft that can come in and drop a JDAM.
> 
> For China, the need of strategic bombing is not needed because all of their potential target is nearby. The need of tier 1 targetting can be done by future stealth fighter, the need of a Strategic Bomber can only be used in a low intensity conflict, which usually China outnumber their enemy.
> 
> So the only way that make sense for this Bomber is to try and bomb the United States mainland (as the only country that miltarily stronger than China) But doing that will undoubtly trigger WW3. So...That would not be anything but a white elephent for China.
> 
> For US, they need strategic bomber, one reason is, they can support them in forward deployment, they have an extensive refueling system, forward deploy base. And most importantly, they have global engagement that needed thsoe bomber because they may not have a forward support base on the next war they are fighting, the last attempt of the strategic bomber used in a strategic role is Operation Black Bucks (1-7), which the RAF uses the vulcan bomber from Acension island to bomb target in Falklands. And even that sorties are stretching the length and sserve nothing but a demostration to the RAF. For China, continue down this road would mean nothing more than a hanger queen and waste of money.



Of course the F-117s and B-2s have different roles, but the F-117's low observability & range can be used as a comparator in terms of operational use. Its distinct advantages over other attack aircraft meant that it could forfeit any required escort/support when attacking heavily-defended targets, itself being a force multiplier that frees up other aerial platforms for other missions. Such bombers is not about concentrating firepower but rather being able to place that firepower at a target that would otherwise be unreachable by other aircraft.

Once again, having a long-range aircraft to deal with short-range targets means that you would have more loitering time & flexibility, which are advantages that any military could use.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

SinoSoldier said:


> Of course the F-117s and B-2s have different roles, but the F-117's low observability & range can be used as a comparator in terms of operational use. Its distinct advantages over other attack aircraft meant that it could forfeit any required escort/support when attacking heavily-defended targets, itself being a force multiplier that frees up other aerial platforms for other missions. Such bombers is not about concentrating firepower but rather being able to place that firepower at a target that would otherwise be unreachable by other aircraft.
> 
> Once again, having a long-range aircraft to deal with short-range targets means that you would have more loitering time & flexibility, which are advantages that any military could use.



.........You are actually purporting my point.

What I was saying is, China need a Tactical Strike Capable fighter like the F-117. China does not need a Strategic Bomber like B-2......

B-2 does not do what the F-117 do, Think of it is you need to bomb a target, a single target, but you want to drop either 80 Mk-82 Freefall Bombs or 40 JDAM on a single target. That target need to be big enough or far enough for you to justify calling such a strike. Most Target China is facing, if China is ever at war would be small, because both Japan and Taiwan is a build up country, they won't have vietnam war type big strategic target such as a large area swamping with enemy surrounding your firebase (ala Khe Sanh) which would warrant a B-52 Arclight strike. Their Command and Control structure, marshalling area would be hidden. That is what Bomber like B-2 do.

China need a F-117 that can penetrate enemy airspace and survive an airstrike and return to base, but China don't need a B-2 type unless you want to target your enemy cities.

And I think we need to stop now.....



randomradio said:


> You don't need JTAC or TTL assets to hit factories, air bases etc. You punch in the coordinates into your missiles and send them out.
> 
> Cruse missiles, ballistic missiles also don't need forward controllers, you need recce aircraft and satellites.
> 
> I am referring to the military industrial hinterland in India, where most of our military stuff is made. That's cities like Pune, Bangalore, Chennai etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Then you won't hit our military industrial complex.
> 
> If you want to get to the mainland, you will have to stay out of reach of the navy's and the air force's tactical fighters and sea based ADS.
> 
> For China to develop a bomber alone means India will need a more sophisticated ADS for Peninsular India. So now we have to throw money on more land based and sea based defences.
> 
> You are also forgetting that China and Russia aren't friends. So it isn't just Japan and Taiwan, there's also US, Russia and India that they have to deal with.
> 
> 
> 
> Your missile needs to come within range first. That's what the bomber is for.
> Hainan to Bangalore is 3500Km. Cruise missiles will have to fly over ASEAN, and their own defences will activate against such an attack, particularly Vietnam's. But if the Chinese develop a bomber that can bypass ASEAN air defences and attack Bangalore from Myanmar, which is just 1500Km away, the attack will be far more effective. And the bomber will be carrying enough missiles to put a dent.
> 
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...orld-he-can-strike-from-1-700-miles-away.html
> 
> 
> 
> A simple tactical bomber won't get close. And even if it did, its payload is too small.
> 
> 
> 
> Peninsular India has very poor ADS. And even if it ever did get ADS, it will not be as sophisticated or numerous as North India.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't. We are not talking about your airspace, we are talking about operating in neutral airspace. Any other tactical fighter will be discovered, considering it can even fly to that range.
> 
> Always remember that bigger the size of the aircraft, the more stealthy it can be against radar.
> 
> 
> 
> The B-2 won't. But the Russians and Chinese don't think that way. They want to use long range missiles on their stealth aircraft, so does India.
> 
> Kh-55. Internal configuration. 3000Km.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kh-101. 3000Km.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can pack more lower ranged missiles. Please consider Russian/Chinese doctrine, not just American.
> 
> Tactical fighters can't carry long range weapons internally. And a few cheaper tactical fighters won't get close because they are going to be less sophisticated.
> 
> 
> 
> NFU is a paper policy, it's not binding. When countries go nuclear, you think treaties matter?
> 
> A stealth bomber is made for a full scale thermonuclear war. It's not made for a short conventional war. That's why it's called a strategic bomber. The B-2 in particular was built for carrying nuclear weapons for use against the Soviet Union.
> 
> Although we have been discussing the conventional use of the bomber, the actual role of this new bomber is obviously strategic. There's no point arguing along the lines of "but they have ICBMs" because the Russians and Americans have far more ICBMs and still use stealth bombers.



Oh well, heeding the warning from the moderator, am not going to discuss further on this issue, if you want, you can open a new thread about whether or not China need these bomber and tag me. I don't want to waste half an hour on something only to be deleted.


----------



## Brainsucker

@jhungary : Then why B-2 is even exist in the first place, if her purpose is only targeting the enemy city? Does America supporting mass civilian killing? The American has their own ballistic missiles too, that can bring a nuclear strike from the silos in their own country.

I think (CMIIW) The sole purpose of B-2 is for deterrent (for now), although it can be use as it's intended purpose, if the US president / generals are mad enough to conduct massacre to the civilians. But, even if it's not being used, it's existence alone can make the enemy think twice before they have such an adventuring mind. No country wants their cities to be flattened by the B-2. So China might has the same idea as the US. IF they ever develop a B-2 type bomber, it will be used as deterrent.


----------



## messiach

I am aware of a turbine-fan development which was dedicated for H6 bomber and possibly for advanced 'stealth bombers'!! but I have not followed it since long. Is there any following here? @Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## phancong

China develop stealth bomber to insure their 2nd nuclear strike deterrent consist of air, space, sea for counter attack against the US nuclear strike on mainland China. Stealth bomber allow China another option to nuke their enemy if China get nuke.


----------



## jhungary

Brainsucker said:


> @jhungary : Then why B-2 is even exist in the first place, if her purpose is only targeting the enemy city? Does America supporting mass civilian killing? The American has their own ballistic missiles too, that can bring a nuclear strike from the silos in their own country.
> 
> I think (CMIIW) The sole purpose of B-2 is for deterrent (for now), although it can be use as it's intended purpose, if the US president / generals are mad enough to conduct massacre to the civilians. But, even if it's not being used, it's existence alone can make the enemy think twice before they have such an adventuring mind. No country wants their cities to be flattened by the B-2. So China might has the same idea as the US. IF they ever develop a B-2 type bomber, it will be used as deterrent.



B-2 is a tactical nuclear delievery platform, the sole reason for the 23 B-2 (21 productions + 2 Prototype) is to take out Soviet Russie C&C and Communication Hub with a B61 or B83 Nuke bomb before Russia can lob their NUke on the US, the primary target, if destroyed, would seriously hamper the Russia Ability to send nuke over US soil, and thus, it allow the convention force to initiate a "Full Count" on Russia Arsenal.

Mind you, B-2 was made with NO CONVENTIONAL CAPABILITY, a factory rolled out B-2 in 1993 cannot drop Mk-82 or Mk-84 bomb, and they can only drop Nuclear Bomb or Nuclear Stand off Missile.

As for why US needed the B-2, I have already said it on my convo with @SinoSoldier I am not going to say it again here. And no, B-2 is not for nuclear deterrent and US does not operate like Russia did, tactical nuke on C&C are not going to be effective on US military, because US have a 4-tiers redundant C&C Structure. And hence China should not be copying the tactical nuclear role that US have in mind with the B-2, unless China is targetting the Russian.

Also, you need to put into the consideration when China have successfully developed B-2 type bomber, Stealth is not going to be any sort of a big deal, where by then, most of the country should have effective anti-stealth technology, thus, rendering the Chinese B-2 useless in their original role.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> What makes You so sure of it ??
> 
> If You compare the H-20's development with the Y-20 - which surely is less complex - then there are reports about:
> 
> - 2010 early: full-scale mock-up completed
> - 2012 early: rumours that the #01 prototype under construction
> - 2013: three prototypes (#01 - #03) finished with the #02 being the static test airframe.
> - 2012 late: first low speed taxiing
> - 2013 early: first flight
> 
> This would correspond to close 3 years from design finalisation to first sight aka taxi test. Even if we don't know how far the H-20's design is completed, but if they are indeed as noted by others like @cirr, they are probably at the stage of detailed design and 3D digital mock-up "construction"; not sure if it can be translated into "full-scale mock-up completed" !??
> 
> Anyway it does not sound as if the design has been completed and construction of a prototype begins soon, but even if it would still mean about three years from now on or about 2020.
> 
> So to assume to see that bird within two years is IMO a bit far fetched or over-optimistic.
> But I would be glad if I'm wrong.
> 
> Deino


The last time when a top commander from the air force making a comment about the on-going project was 2009 about J20, which we saw it at the end of 2010, and this time it was the Air force commander saying that "you will be seeing it soon".So i recon two years is more reasonable.


----------



## gambit

jhungary said:


> Maybe @gambit can shred more light on how B-2 bring Tactical Edge on battlefield? Beucase as far as I saw it on the ground, it didn't.


Sure it can...






Each JDAM was released from 40,000 ft altitude and in a single pass.

This does not mean that targets like the Obvra airfield can be hit only by a 'stealth' platform. The B-52 or the Bone could have done it. The Bone can carry 24 2,000 lbs JDAMs in an all JDAMs mission.

Anyway...An airfield that launches fighter-bombers can turn the fight on the front lines, so the question is on how do we interpret, or expand, the definition of what constitute 'tactical'. Before airpower, what is 'tactical', as defined by the army, is any fighting that is currently on going and anticipated within the next 48 hrs and distance of about 20 miles max over the horizon. With airpower, that anticipation was expanded to about 96 hrs and distance of about 100 miles. For the army, that is 100 accessible miles, meaning using ground vehicles. For an air field, that is 100 miles of protection from enemy troops.

A fighter-bomber squadron is a tactical fleet, even with the technology of air refueling. The assumption for most air forces is that air refueling is a luxury that they do not have, therefore, any war planning by that air force must take into consideration payload type vs fuel vs range vs loiter time to maximize benefits for one's own army.

Assume the fighting is 100 miles away from the air field. The army can impede the progress of enemy army, but it is up to that air field to defend itself against the enemy air force and that 100 miles is less than 10 minutes of flight time.

A long range 'stealth' bomber platform by one side introduces uncertainty into the war planning process on the other side, even down to the tactical level. The fighter-bombers cannot be a tactical threat to the air field that houses those long range 'stealth' bombers, whereas those 'stealth' bombers can be a tactical threat to enemy army and enemy air field. The enemy army counts on its air field to deliver those fighter-bombers to the front lines. Denial of that forces the enemy army to reduce its tactical planning to 48 hrs and 20 miles, while allowing your army to maintain its tactical planning to 96 hrs and 100 miles.

Advantage -- yours.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Foxtrot Delta

*China To Announce New Strategic Stealth Bomber Around 2020: Report*
Our Bureau
08:39 AM, February 20, 2017
665 views




Future Chinese H-20 stealth bomber
- A +


China is likely to announce its home-grown nuclear capable Long Range Strike Bomber (LRSB) around 2020.

According to a report by Chinamil citing an article by a Japanese scholar in July 2015,titled, “"China to develop new type of long-range strategic bomber", which referred to the H-20, a name that's commonly used now. Someone compared it with America's B-2 strategic bomber and called it the "red B-2".

As per the report, the continuous occurring of China’s 20 series suggests that the new LRSB will be developed by 2020.

"20" is a code used for China's new-generation aviation equipment and also implies these equipment's combat capability will be formed around 2020.

Now that China is to develop a new-generation LRSB. Given the connotations of "20", it makes sense to name the new long-range bomber "H-20", but the official name is yet to be announced by Chinese military authorities.

China has overcome many technical difficulties in strategic bomber so far, including engine, air inlet, material and stealth technology. It is progressing fast on the development of precise guided munition, and has amassed experience in manufacturing the Y-20 military aircraft.

"We are developing the new-generation long range strike bomber (LRSB). You will see it in the future," said the PLA Air Force commander Ma Xiaotian at a PLA Air Force open day event when answering reporters’ questions on September 1, 2016.

The next-generation LRSB has an intercontinental flying range of more than 10,000km and combat radius of over 5,000km. With air refueling, it is able to fly and carry out missions around the globe
Aimed to lower the R&D cost and enhance strike capability, the new bomber will have a slightly smaller bomb load than B-2A (23 tons) but larger than H-6K.

The LRSB will have both nuclear and regular strike capability to hit the enemy's key links and systemic weaknesses. The bomber is also capable of large-capacity date fusion and transmission. It can serve as a C4ISR node and interact with large sensor platforms like UAV, early warning aircraft and strategic reconnaissance aircraft to share information and target data, reported ChinaMil.

At the moment, the US and Russia both have their own long-range bombers, the former having B-52H, B-1B and B-2A and the latter having Tu-160 and Tu-95MS, and they have both plans for developing next-generation strategic bombers.

Source:
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/18...ealth_Bomber_Around_2020__Report#.WK75M59RXqA

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

*Please !!! We already have a dedicated thread for so many You just started during the last few hours. Please do a search before You start a new one if already an thread exists. 
Thanks.*

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Foxtrot Delta

Deino said:


> *Please !!! We already have a dedicated thread for so many You just stared during the last few hours. Please do a search before You start a new one if already an thread exists.
> Thanks.*
> 
> Deino


K


----------



## Stuttgart001

The Xian H-20 is a subsonic stealth bomber design of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force, due to enter service in the future. It is a “strategic project” for china. The aircraft will feature a wing design similar to that of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit, with components already being manufactured. Analysts note that the bomber may enter service by 2025, and will seek to replace China’s existing fleet of Xian H-6K bombers.

Admiral Yin said the H-20 stealth bomber will certainly be on par with the United States’ Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit. He noted China has gained some experience in stealth technology from the development of Chengdu J-20 and the Shenyang J-31 stealth fighters, so the material and design isn’t a big problem.

The US B-2 entered service in 1997 as the second aircraft designed to have advanced stealth technology after the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk attack aircraft
The US Northrop B-2 is capable of all-altitude attack missions up to 50,000 feet (15,000 m), with a range of more than 6,000 nautical miles (6,900 mi; 11,000 km) on internal fuel and over 10,000 nautical miles (12,000 mi; 19,000 km) with one midair refueling. 

According to the China Daily, Chinese military officials have made clear intentions to develop a strategic bomber capable of striking targets beyond the second island chain without aerial refueling, while carrying a payload of at least 10 tons

China’s first stealth bomber will be developed and produced by Xi’an Aircraft Industrial Corporation, the same firm that makes the H-6K.

The H-6K has a range of about 3200 nautical miles.

China’s decision to go ahead with its own stealth bomber seems to have been triggered by its failure to buy Russia’s supersonic Tupolev Tu-22M3 variable-sweep wing, long-range strategic and maritime strike bomber developed by the Tupolev Design Bureau.

This Russian bomber has a combat radius of 2,400 kilometers and can carry up to 24,000 kilograms of bombs and missiles.

Western military analysts said China needs the H-20 to deny the U.S. from entering the “First Island Chain” from Alaska to the Philippines, and to cement its military leadership in Asia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Stuttgart001

*China’s military leaders talk up plans for the H-20 strategic bomber*
An article published by the China Military Online website on 7 December has provided further insights into the requirements for China’s new strategic bomber.

China is developing a new long-range strategic bomber referred to in the article as the H-20.




While General Ma gave no details of the programme, Rear Admiral Yin, who is also a regular media commentator on Chinese military developments, commented that as the “cruise missiles, nuclear weapons, and other weapons and equipment that will be carried by domestic strategic bombers are all in place”, the time was right for China to develop a new strategic bomber.

He stated that China’s current long-range bomber, the Xian Aircraft Corporation (XAC) H-6 series (a modernised Tupolov Tu-16 Badger derivative) is not truly a strategic bomber and suggested that the new aircraft will have characteristics comparable with those of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber.

The experience and knowledge in the design of stealth aircraft gained from the development of the stealthy J-20 and F-31 combat aircraft, together with the associated understanding and application of advanced materials technology, also present an opportune moment to progress the requirement for a new strategic bomber.

Speaking of whether China can develop supersonic stealth strategic bombers, military expert Li Li said that this is technically Precisely because of the emphasis is laid on the stealth performance, the aircraft’s aerodynamic configuration will be quite different from that of a supersonic bomber. May be a more realistic solution to select from the stealth capability and supersonic penetration.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## nang2

Stuttgart001 said:


> *China’s military leaders talk up plans for the H-20 strategic bomber*
> An article published by the China Military Online website on 7 December has provided further insights into the requirements for China’s new strategic bomber.
> 
> China is developing a new long-range strategic bomber referred to in the article as the H-20.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While General Ma gave no details of the programme, Rear Admiral Yin, who is also a regular media commentator on Chinese military developments, commented that as the “cruise missiles, nuclear weapons, and other weapons and equipment that will be carried by domestic strategic bombers are all in place”, the time was right for China to develop a new strategic bomber.
> 
> He stated that China’s current long-range bomber, the Xian Aircraft Corporation (XAC) H-6 series (a modernised Tupolov Tu-16 Badger derivative) is not truly a strategic bomber and suggested that the new aircraft will have characteristics comparable with those of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber.
> 
> The experience and knowledge in the design of stealth aircraft gained from the development of the stealthy J-20 and F-31 combat aircraft, together with the associated understanding and application of advanced materials technology, also present an opportune moment to progress the requirement for a new strategic bomber.
> 
> Speaking of whether China can develop supersonic stealth strategic bombers, military expert Li Li said that this is technically Precisely because of the emphasis is laid on the stealth performance, the aircraft’s aerodynamic configuration will be quite different from that of a supersonic bomber. May be a more realistic solution to select from the stealth capability and supersonic penetration.


what is its name? flying stingray?


----------



## Stuttgart001

nang2 said:


> what is its name? flying stingray?


It will not be named until the first prototype rolls out ,i guess.


----------



## nang2

Stuttgart001 said:


> It will not be named until the first prototype rolls out ,i guess.


 I was mocking that picture.


----------



## GS Zhou

grey boy 2 said:


>



PLAAF Spoke Person: PLAAF is very close to the entrance gate of strategic air force; also very close to the era of space technologies. PLAAF will accelerate its growth pace. 
中国空军新闻发言人申进科大校20日发布这一信息时表示，空军在强军目标引领下砥砺奋进，全面推进转型建设，*已经历史性地接近战略空军门槛、历史性地接近空天领域前沿。加快建设世界一流战略空军*，需要牢固树立国际视野，加强国际军事交流，学习借鉴外军有益经验，提升部队实战化训练水平，增强空军在更加广阔的空间遂行多样化军事任务能力。

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## 帅的一匹

GS Zhou said:


> PLAAF Spoke Person: PLAAF is very close to the entrance gate of strategic air force; also very close to the era of space technologies. PLAAF will accelerate its growth pace.
> 中国空军新闻发言人申进科大校20日发布这一信息时表示，空军在强军目标引领下砥砺奋进，全面推进转型建设，*已经历史性地接近战略空军门槛、历史性地接近空天领域前沿。加快建设世界一流战略空军*，需要牢固树立国际视野，加强国际军事交流，学习借鉴外军有益经验，提升部队实战化训练水平，增强空军在更加广阔的空间遂行多样化军事任务能力。


Good! I think he insinuate that H20 bomber is gonna debut?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GS Zhou

wanglaokan said:


> Good! I think he insinuate that H20 bomber is gonna debut?


I think so too. 

His words regarding "strategic air force" implies that we may see H20 prototype soon; "era of space technologies" implies that PLAAF may deploy hypersonic space vehicles soon. I used to think such space stuff would be operated by Second Artillery/Rocket Force, but it seems I was wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Shotgunner51

GS Zhou said:


> I think so too.
> 
> His words regarding "strategic air force" implies that we may see H20 prototype soon; "era of space technologies" implies that PLAAF may deploy hypersonic space vehicles soon. I used to think such space stuff would be operated by Second Artillery/Rocket Force, but it seems I was wrong.


Interesting! I wonder where is the line that separates these three forces:

PLAAF, them going strategic is a must, aka possessing capabilities in strategic airlift, strategic strike, but not so sure what their space capabilities ("历史性地接近空天领域前沿") mean.

PLARF (PLA Rocket Force), perhaps they are the one who will operate nuke-armed DF-ZF?

PLASSF (PLS Strategic Support Force). Sources said other than three info & cyberwarfare corps, they also have seven space warfare corps (军事航天部队), wonder what kind of offensive weaponry will they operate?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

GS Zhou said:


> PLAAF Spoke Person: PLAAF is very close to the entrance gate of strategic air force; also very close to the era of space technologies. PLAAF will accelerate its growth pace.
> 中国空军新闻发言人申进科大校20日发布这一信息时表示，空军在强军目标引领下砥砺奋进，全面推进转型建设，*已经历史性地接近战略空军门槛、历史性地接近空天领域前沿。加快建设世界一流战略空军*，需要牢固树立国际视野，加强国际军事交流，学习借鉴外军有益经验，提升部队实战化训练水平，增强空军在更加广阔的空间遂行多样化军事任务能力。




What's the source for this statement !?


----------



## GS Zhou

Deino said:


> What's the source for this statement !?


PRC MOD
http://www.mod.gov.cn/power/2017-06/21/content_4783405.htm

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

Thanks a lot !


----------



## cnleio

China H-20 stealth bomber prototype

(only satellite spy photo)

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

It looks like a prepared maiden flight for this fall.


----------



## Akasa

UAV, not a bomber.


----------



## Deino

cnleio said:


> China H-20 stealth bomber prototype
> 
> (only satellite spy photo)
> View attachment 416850
> View attachment 416851




At best a sub-scale RCS-testmodel.


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> View attachment 416860


Compared with the facility house, it is not a small one.


----------



## Deino

YuChen said:


> Compared with the facility house, it is not a small one.




Indeed. Regrettable that "thing" is not visible at GE and my TerraServer-access is limited. Anyway by comparing with that taxiway and even if both images are not to the same size it has about 18m span.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

PS:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/894816278623305728


----------



## SOHEIL

Deino said:


> Indeed. Regrettable that "thing" is not visible at GE and my TerraServer-access is limited. Anyway by comparing with that taxiway and even if both images are not to the same size it has about 18m span.
> 
> View attachment 416861



UCAV !


----------



## Tiqiu



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Deino

Tiqiu said:


> View attachment 416867




Good joke !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tiqiu

Damn, I was serious

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

SOHEIL said:


> UCAV !




But what is it? A subscale demonstrator, a revised Dark Sword ? A H-X-model for RCS-testing ???



Tiqiu said:


> Damn, I was serious



An even better one !  ... that can't be real at least not yet.


----------



## Olli Ranta

cnleio said:


> China H-20 stealth bomber prototype
> 
> (only satellite spy photo)
> View attachment 416850
> View attachment 416851


On 18.1. Grey Boy2 had this one among new year greetings and it looks similar. Could it be a swing wing design?
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-air-force-plaaf-news-discussions.84214/page-97


----------



## SOHEIL

Deino said:


> But what is it? A subscale demonstrator, a revised Dark Sword ? A H-X-model for RCS-testing ???



Lijian 002 (?)


----------



## cnleio

Deino said:


> Good joke !


I don't think the pic is PSed, it looks like real H-20 flight with 2x J-20. 
I believe the spy photo of H-20 is real. 






















Olli Ranta said:


> On 18.1. Grey Boy2 had this one among new year greetings and it looks similar. Could it be a swing wing design?
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-air-force-plaaf-news-discussions.84214/page-97
> View attachment 416868


As far as i knew, China H-20 will more like the B-21 stealth bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## SOHEIL

cnleio said:


> I don't think the pic is PSed, it looks like real H-20 flight with 2x J-20.
> I believe the spy photo of H-20 is real.
> 
> View attachment 416894
> 
> View attachment 416897
> 
> View attachment 416898
> 
> View attachment 416899
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as i knew, China H-20 will more like the B-21 stealth bomber.
> View attachment 416901
> 
> View attachment 416904
> 
> View attachment 416905



It's absolutely fake !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

SOHEIL said:


> It's absolutely fake !


We should delete this H-X/H-20 stealth bomb thread, coz ppl just post fake news & fake pics here ... but i had proved the photo not PSed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Olli Ranta said:


> On 18.1. Grey Boy2 had this one among new year greetings and it looks similar. Could it be a swing wing design?
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-air-force-plaaf-news-discussions.84214/page-97
> View attachment 416868




That's a pure fan-art !



cnleio said:


> I believe the spy photo of H-20 is real.




Alone size-wise it is too small to be a bomber: With a length of 10.5m and a span of 15.5m it's even smaller than the X-47B. So either a subscale demonstrator or RCS-model or something different, but surely never the real H-20.



cnleio said:


> We should delete this H-X/H-20 stealth bomb thread, coz ppl just post fake news & fake pics here ... but i had proved the photo not PSed.




Sorry to contradict. I agree that we should take a hash discipline to avoid fakes being posted but I still not believe Your image as real.


----------



## hirobo2

Don't know if it's real or not, but that can't be the H-20. It looks too... American. If we take cues from the J-20, the H-20 will defintely look dissimilar to any Murican plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Development C&P

Network rumors is just “Electromagnetic Characteristic Test Scale Model”……
Who knows?
Long ago, the official rumors that the words will be the first flight in 2017, God knows.

Before the official video or clear picture comes out just the model or PS.
Let's wash and sleep~

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navin A

jhungary said:


> To be honest, I never even see why China would develop a Strategic Bomber, tactical bomber maybe, but I honestly do not see why China will need long range Strategic bomber in this stage of the air force progress.
> 
> Strategic bomber have 1 sole purpose only, that is to bomb a target that far away from you. Except that maybe you want to start a nuclear war with bomber, but we hardly do this anymore as we now got the ICBM.
> 
> So, by building a stealth strategic bomber fleet, Chinese Military are declaring an intention of bombing inter-continental strategic target, which does not make sense, especially after the Chinese are very keen on making their 2nd Arty corp. sharper.
> 
> However, when you come down and look at Chinese enemy list, almost all her enemy are near or even neighbour to China, then why would you need a Strategic bomber to begin with.
> 
> And if the bomber intended target is the United States, which mean a total thermonuclear war, then China again, don't need those bomber
> 
> So, is this a warning that China will now starting to **** off small country far away from China like the US now or it's just they **** their money off to something that do not have much of a use again??
> 
> If China are to build a air transport fleet or auxiliary air fleet, I would understand, but building a Strategic bomber at this stage, I don't really understand why



Exactly there is no sense making this aircraft when you have ICMBs. In real effect even the USAF still uses the b52 and b1, which are quite capable of doing the job.

This is just to project thier so called peaceful rise


----------



## jhungary

cnleio said:


> We should delete this H-X/H-20 stealth bomb thread, coz ppl just post fake news & fake pics here ... but i had proved the photo not PSed.



The Image is fake. If you zoom in to maximize resolution, you will see the "H-20" have a white layer surrounding the bomber, indicate the background pixel of the bomber does not match the background pixel of all the rest. Which indicate the subject within the white layer was key into the picture from another picture and another background. Normally, only leading edge that reflex the light will give out a white glow, not the whole thing because sun shrine on one direction, and that would shadow the item.

Enlargement of the H-20 Photo (You can see the white layer on all the leading edge of the bomber (especially behind the bomber), even tho the aft of the bomber should not have reflective edge because sunlight was blocked by the parts that facing the sun.







Look at a Clear Enlarged B-2 Image flying with a B-52 (Look how the image got darker at the back of the bomber?) That's because that is the shadow of the B-2 trailing the sun. You can clearly see the sun position in respect to the bomber at the time the photo is taken, it was on 1-3 o'clock position of the bomber. 






For definite prove (100% prove) you can put the image into a pixel comparison program and you will get a definite answer, but judging from the visual cue, I would say the image is 80% to 90% fake, because of the light and the contrast of the object.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jhungary

Navin A said:


> Exactly there is no sense making this aircraft when you have ICMBs. In real effect even the USAF still uses the b52 and b1, which are quite capable of doing the job.
> 
> This is just to project thier so called peaceful rise



Strategic Bomber only ever make sense if 2 conditions are set.

1.) You have enemy you want to bomb but you cannot touch them with your conventional fighter/fighter-bomber.
2.) You have an established system to provide support and escort to these bomber, which mean overseas airbases, mid-air refueller and long range fighter escort and so on)

For number 1. All the potential enemy of China is right next to China, India, Vietnam, Japan, Guam, they are all within reach for Conventional Bomber. If the Chinese is making these bomber to try and bomb US, which would mean Thermonuclear War. And unless China decided to bomb England, France or Middle Eastern Country for whatever reason, these bomber is not going to be used for anything.

For number 2. Strategic Bomber require many forward deployed asset, in the US military, Strategic Bomber (apart from B-2) are seldom place and launch their sorties from CONUS. B-52 is permanently based in Guam, B-1 is based in England, Hawai'i and Japan. That's because it's not economical even if it is doable to launch sorties from CONUS (But to clear out, they do launch sortie from CONUS) China does not own any overseas bases, which mean every sorties the Chinese launch using these bomber would have to launch from Chinese mainland itself, that would require a lot of refueller to refuel the bomber in and out of the mission, also, you will need to refuel the escort all the way from China and back, unless the bomber go solo, which is very much a target unless China is certain overall air superiority can be achieve over objective area, mind you, you still need to forward deploy your fighter to do that. Which mean you can't achieve Total Air dominance because every fighter you launch to gain air superiority, you launch them in China. It's like US sending B-2 or B-1 bomber and Bomb China without escort fighter flying from Guam, Japan or so on. I would have image the B2 or B-1 would have been cut to ribbon unless US can gain Air Superiority over China.

Which left one possible solution remain as to why China want these bomber. They are using it as nuclear deterrent platform, the problem is, again, without fighter escort, these bomber would not do much and would be intercepted quite easily and also for that matter, it would be more perferrable to use sub-launch tactical missile instead of air-launch tactical missile to begin with, so it's kind of pointless as to why China is making these, beside telling the world, I can make them, but they are not fully supported, hence of no use on any given war the Chinese may or may not fight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Navin A

jhungary said:


> Strategic Bomber only ever make sense if 2 conditions are set.
> 
> 1.) You have enemy you want to bomb but you cannot touch them with your conventional fighter/fighter-bomber.
> 2.) You have an established system to provide support and escort to these bomber, which mean overseas airbases, mid-air refueller and long range fighter escort and so on)
> 
> For number 1. All the potential enemy of China is right next to China, India, Vietnam, Japan, Guam, they are all within reach for Conventional Bomber. If the Chinese is making these bomber to try and bomb US, which would mean Thermonuclear War. And unless China decided to bomb England, France or Middle Eastern Country for whatever reason, these bomber is not going to be used for anything.
> 
> For number 2. Strategic Bomber require many forward deployed asset, in the US military, Strategic Bomber (apart from B-2) are seldom place and launch their sorties from CONUS. B-52 is permanently based in Guam, B-1 is based in England, Hawai'i and Japan. That's because it's not economical even if it is doable to launch sorties from CONUS (But to clear out, they do launch sortie from CONUS) China does not own any overseas bases, which mean every sorties the Chinese launch using these bomber would have to launch from Chinese mainland itself, that would require a lot of refueller to refuel the bomber in and out of the mission, also, you will need to refuel the escort all the way from China and back, unless the bomber go solo, which is very much a target unless China is certain overall air superiority can be achieve over objective area, mind you, you still need to forward deploy your fighter to do that. Which mean you can't achieve Total Air dominance because every fighter you launch to gain air superiority, you launch them in China. It's like US sending B-2 or B-1 bomber and Bomb China without escort fighter flying from Guam, Japan or so on. I would have image the B2 or B-1 would have been cut to ribbon unless US can gain Air Superiority over China.
> 
> Which left one possible solution remain as to why China want these bomber. They are using it as nuclear deterrent platform, the problem is, again, without fighter escort, these bomber would not do much and would be intercepted quite easily and also for that matter, it would be more perferrable to use sub-launch tactical missile instead of air-launch tactical missile to begin with, so it's kind of pointless as to why China is making these, beside telling the world, I can make them, but they are not fully supported, hence of no use on any given war the Chinese may or may not fight.



Precisely the exercise is futile and would deplete so much resources, it would also expose their asset's to being targeted over a Vast distance... as i said earlier this is just to project power and nothing more.


----------



## Deino

Could it be this one ??? Shown as the UAV Star Glory during Zhuhai 2016.






PS: ... and also the dimensions would fit !


----------



## jhungary

Deino said:


> Could it be this one ??? Shown as the UAV Star Glory during Zhuhai 2016.
> 
> View attachment 417422
> 
> 
> PS: ... and also the dimensions would fit !
> 
> View attachment 417428



This is a drone, *Payload at 400 kg*, unlikely to be any type of strategic bomber.

Plus It's actually smaller than X-47B.


----------



## Deino

jhungary said:


> This is a drone, *Payload at 400 kg*, unlikely to be any type of strategic bomber.
> 
> Plus It's actually smaller than X-47B.



Yes, as such it is indeed in the wrong thread but it was not me who suggest it as the H-20.
IMO it was clear from the beginning that it is either a subscale RSC-mode or a drone ... only.


----------



## Deino

A PS to that post from 7th August concerning that unique RSC-model or UAV/UCAV spotted at the "National Target Signature Research and Experimental Center" at Gaobeidian.

Allegedly a higher resolution image was posted at Twitter today, however I'm not sure if the image has not been manipulated? The edges of the wings look IMO a bit strange in comparison to the first image.


----------



## cirr

Tick tock, tick tock......






"盗龙DaoLong"("Eoraptor") long-range bomber

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## lmjiao

cirr said:


> Tick tock, tick tock......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "盗龙DaoLong"("Eoraptor") long-range bomber



It is approaching. Once again, let's say hello to the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

cirr said:


> Tick tock, tick tock......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "盗龙DaoLong"("Eoraptor") long-range bomber


3x engines ???

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

But surely this thing at that RCS-teststand is never the real deal. It's simply much too small for a long-range bomber.


----------



## Development C&P

cirr said:


> Tick tock, tick tock......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "盗龙DaoLong"("Eoraptor") long-range bomber



just may be the case：




独龙？DuLoong?……






W!T!F!!!
Turned out to be so sci-fi!!!
Really？？！

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Development C&P said:


> just may be the case：
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 独龙？DuLoong?……
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> W!T!F!!!
> Turned out to be so sci-fi!!!
> Really？？！



I like it, that will work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

cirr said:


> Tick tock, tick tock......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "盗龙DaoLong"("Eoraptor") long-range bomber


Some CGI

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

but these are fan-made CG', that are floating thru the net since years !!

IMO not very reliable.


----------



## gambit

cnleio said:


> Some CGI


And terrible ones...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jkroo

@cirr After 5 years when you create this thread, now it is time for us to celebrate.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yantong1980

cnleio said:


> 3x engines ???
> 
> View attachment 418099



Uh, what that officer say about? So that 'DL' sketch was real project?


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

gambit said:


> And terrible ones...



Regardless, it's better than to make a copy from B-2, I hate when we just copy without making any innovation over the aerodynamic shape such as J5, J6, J-7, J-11...only J-31 & J-20 merit my appreciation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Brainsucker

Yes, I read from the CCTV yesterday that H-20 has her maiden flight yesterday. But even with that, there is no picture of that long range bomber?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Brainsucker said:


> Yes, I read from the CCTV yesterday that H-20 has her maiden flight yesterday. But even with that, there is no picture of that long range bomber?




IMO impossible ... but do You have a link for that ?


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> IMO impossible ... but do You have a link for that ?



It's in CCTV 4, Deino. I just read the text in a glance. It's the running text at the bottom of the screen. But I can be wrong about this.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lmjiao

Brainsucker said:


> Yes, I read from the CCTV yesterday that H-20 has her maiden flight yesterday. But even with that, there is no picture of that long range bomber?


No, bro. Not flight yet, not even taxi.

But everything should come in near future. Quite near.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

H6N







Also H-20 prototype reportedly rolled off the assembly line on 08.06.2017

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> ...
> Also H-20 prototype reportedly rolled off the assembly line on 08.06.2017



What and who is the source of this report ?


----------



## khanasifm

They parked it outside to disclose it to the world ?? I guess they did it intentionally


----------



## Jlaw

Brainsucker said:


> It's in CCTV 4, Deino. I just read the text in a glance. It's the running text at the bottom of the screen. But I can be wrong about this.


You're Chinese indonesian.better not let them know you can read Chinese. You be killed in Indonesia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## yantong1980

lmjiao said:


> No, bro. Not flight yet, not even taxi.
> 
> But everything should come in near future. Quite near.



Hope not for long, can't wait to see. It's time for rumor and speculation end.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## onebyone

A new long-range strategic bomber design (*H-20*?) has been under development at 603 Institute/XAC since early 2000s. Various configurations were studied in detail. One configuration was a supersonic bomber with a conventional design (delta wings with canards?), another was a 4-engine subsonic stealth flying wing design similar to American B-2. Scale-down models were built. By 2011 the overall configuration was finalized which appears be the flying wing design. Some of the technology including the design of flying wing, dorsal engine intake and exhaust as well as the flight control system might have gained some help from the experience of the *Sharp Sword* UCAV. The engine is likely to be the modified WS-10 without A/B. The aircraft is expected to feature an AESA radar with twin conformal antennas below the leading wing edges similar to American AN/APQ-181 LPI radar. For armaments it can carry KD-20/DF-10K ALCMs internally on a rotary launcher or conventional bombs on bomb racks. *H-20* is believed to be able to evade modern air defence systems and penetrate deep into the enemy territory. It was reported in March 2013 that the development of *H-20* (referred to as the "strategic project") is gaining full speed at 603/XAC after the successful flight of *Y-20*. It was reported in November 2015 that the aircraft could feature twin dorsal S-shaped engine intakes with saw tooth lips similar to those of B-2. Consequently the engines are sunk into the main wing structure to further reduce the RCS. It was reported in December 2015 that a 3D digital prototype was built. It was reported in February 2017 that the QC platform of the digital prototype was built. The first prototype could fly as early as 2019. The latest rumor (August 2017) claimed that the first prototype (or a flying wing technology demonstrator?) rolled down the assembly line at XAC on June 8, 2017. First flight was speculated to be within 2018 but this has not been confirmed. 

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.de/p/attack-aircraft-ii.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## onebyone



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lmjiao

Latest rumors said that the taxi will be performed during October, at least before end of this year.

Source:https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2407714&extra=page=1

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

Deino said:


> but these are fan-made CG', that are floating thru the net since years !!
> 
> IMO not very reliable.


but that handdraw picture is quite reliable``

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

rcrmj said:


> but that handdraw picture is quite reliable``



A three engined plane?


----------



## rcrmj

SinoSoldier said:


> A three engined plane?


dont know`````


----------



## Deino

rcrmj said:


> but that handdraw picture is quite reliable``




But it contradicts all images we know so far: three engines, a huge intake all over the cockpit section, ... IMO completely unrealistic for a true stealth bomber.


----------



## rcrmj

Deino said:


> But it contradicts all images we know so far: three engines, a huge intake all over the cockpit section, ... IMO completely unrealistic for a true stealth bomber.


I dont know whether it is going to have three engines or two engines```I just know that funny guy who draw this cute amature picture actually knows something about H-20

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

rcrmj said:


> I dont know whether it is going to have three engines or two engines```I just know that funny guy who draw this cute amature picture actually knows something about H-20



Interesting, any idea, when we will see the first clearer image of the real aircraft?


----------



## 星海军事

rcrmj said:


> but that handdraw picture is quite reliable``









Please take notice of the date when the original CG was posted.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

星海军事 said:


> Please take notice of the date when the original CG was posted.



Uppss ! Tha old !! I had is saved on my harddrive I think about 2012 ... but already 2007 !



lmjiao said:


> Latest rumors said that the taxi will be performed during October, at least before end of this year.
> 
> Source:https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2407714&extra=page=1




Must have missed that post ... taxi test already planned for October !! 

To admit I still resist to believe but I'm willing to be surprised again.

Anyway if I'm not completely wrong, that Beast is build at XAC at Xi'an that also builds the Y-20 ?? ... or is there a new facility responsible?

Deino


----------



## 星海军事

Deino said:


> Uppss ! Tha old !! I had is saved on my harddrive I think about 2012 ... but already 2007 !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Must have missed that post ... taxi test already planned for October !!
> 
> To admit I still resist to believe but I'm willing to be surprised again.
> 
> Anyway if I'm not completely wrong, that Beast is build at XAC at Xi'an that also builds the Y-20 ?? ... or is there a new facility responsible?
> 
> Deino



Yet another unreliable source...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> Yet another unreliable source...



Do we know when the H-20 might be rolled out of the factory?


----------



## lmjiao

星海军事 said:


> Yet another unreliable source...


Yes, it's unreliable. That's why I call it rumor.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

with H-20, China will add new toy to their strategically collection, this will offer new strategically option to deal with Japan and US and give China a more credible deterrence beyond 2nd island chain and SCS, there is no doubt that China seeking the nuclear parity with H-20 and 096 sub, form a triad capability as US and Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> with H-20, China will add new toy to their strategically collection, this will offer new strategically option to deal with Japan and US and give China a more credible deterrence beyond 2nd island chain and SCS, there is no doubt that China seeking the nuclear parity with H-20 and 096 sub, form a triad capability as US and Russia.


I'm much more excited about its capability as a platform for naval strikes. Just imagine a squadron of these beasts carrying a score of hypersonic anti-ship missiles. _Each_.

They don't see me soarin'. . . They sinkin'. . .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I'm much more excited about its capability as a platform for naval strikes. Just imagine a squadron of these beasts carrying a score of hypersonic anti-ship missiles. _Each_.
> 
> They don't see me soarin'. . . They sinkin'. . .



Not only that, breach beyond 2nd island chains without challenge with a nuclear parity, only that then China shall be safe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

Deino said:


> Interesting, any idea, when we will see the first clearer image of the real aircraft?


I dont know`````anyway dont read too much into what I'm saying, just my chain of source, I am more confident on naval stuff rather than air or land```

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cirr

I can almost hear the footsteps of H-XX as the plane prepares its grand debut.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> I can almost hear the footsteps of H-XX as the plane prepares its grand debut.




So within days, weeks, months !??


----------



## lmjiao

SinoSoldier said:


> Do we know when the H-20 might be rolled out of the factory?



According to latest rumor: The first H-20 rolled out of the factory on *Jun. 08, 2017*.

Yes, it's already finished.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

lmjiao said:


> According to latest rumor: The first H-20 rolled out of the factory on *Jun. 08, 2017*.
> 
> Yes, it's already finished.



Having placed off the assembly line does not mean it has been rolled out of the factory.


----------



## Deino

PS ... by the way do You remember back in late 2010, when the first blurred images of the J-20-demonstrator were leaked ??

I was searching thru my collection and if I'm not wrong, this was the very first image showing the J-20 during a taxi test on 22. December 2010








lmjiao said:


> According to latest rumor: The first H-20 rolled out of the factory on *Jun. 08, 2017*.
> 
> Yes, it's already finished.




How reliable are these reports?


----------



## lmjiao

Latest official news has confirmed the H-20(HX in the news) has finished it's design. 
(of course, the design should be finished years ago, but it's the first time confirmed officially)



> 张骞文，女，1987年11月出生，中共党员，工程师。2013年4月西安理工大学材料学专业硕士毕业。2013年7月于中航飞机西安飞机分公司就职，历任23厂工艺员、23厂工艺室副主任、现任蒙皮成形厂技术科蒙皮工艺室主任。参加工作以来，张骞文先后完成C919、TA600、HX、H6N、ARJ21等5个型号的新机研制任务，负责解决生产过程中的各类技术、质量、生产等问题。



The news is actually a CV of a female enginer "张骞文"(Zhang Qianwen). Her CV shows that she took part in the design of the finished types of C919 etc., which include the most important type *HX. *We believe that this HX means H-20. And the next H6N in the latest version of H-6 after H-6K which has air refuel capability.

Link: http://www.sohu.com/a/165307613_600531



SinoSoldier said:


> Having placed off the assembly line does not mean it has been rolled out of the factory.


You are right. I may misunderstand the words of "rolled out". But yes, it has placed off the assembly line.



Deino said:


> How reliable are these reports?



I am sorry but I have to say it's unreliable rumor.

I personally believe it's true. But I have no confirmation.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

@lmjiao 

Thanks a lot !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> Do we know when the H-20 might be rolled out of the factory?



In terms of the "long-range strike bomber", I know as much as you do. 

I suspect many of our friends on this forum did not realize the level of sensitivity of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aliaselin

I will go there in months to confirm it


----------



## cirr

lmjiao said:


> Latest official news has confirmed the H-20(HX in the news) has finished it's design.
> (of course, the design should be finished years ago, but it's the first time confirmed officially)
> 
> 
> 
> The news is actually a CV of a female enginer "张骞文"(Zhang Qianwen). Her CV shows that she took part in the design of the finished types of C919 etc., which include the most important type *HX. *We believe that this HX means H-20. And the next H6N in the latest version of H-6 after H-6K which has air refuel capability.
> 
> Link: http://www.sohu.com/a/165307613_600531
> 
> 
> You are right. I may misunderstand the words of "rolled out". But yes, it has placed off the assembly line.
> 
> 
> 
> I am sorry but I have to say it's unreliable rumor.
> 
> I personally believe it's true. But I have no confirmation.













Looks like XAC has a few more undisclosed projects up its sleeve

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> Looks like XAC has a few more undisclosed projects up its sleeve



Any kind member here willing to translate ?


----------



## kuge

is that a hoax?


----------



## Deino

kuge said:


> is that a hoax?
> View attachment 420050




YES ... faked and already posted a few pages ago.


----------



## Brainsucker

I don't understand, why we call HX as H-20. The Chinese Officer was said that it is a long range bomber, not a stealth bomber. And Cirr's Chinese quote show that they call it HX, not H-20. So we shouldn't speculate much and wait for more info about this new bomber. 

For now, we should call it HX rather than H-20.


----------



## Figaro

Brainsucker said:


> I don't understand, why we call HX as H-20. The Chinese Officer was said that it is a long range bomber, not a stealth bomber. And Cirr's Chinese quote show that they call it HX, not H-20. So we shouldn't speculate much and wait for more info about this new bomber.
> 
> For now, we should call it HX rather than H-20.


Hi. According to credible rumors on Chinese boards, the term H-X is synonymous with H-20. Regarding your point on "long range bomber", it was decided long ago that the new bomber would feature stealth given the experience with the J-20. In short, a stealthy subsonic bomber similar to the B-2 was chosen in favor of a supersonic design (Russian blackjack bomber). It is fairly obviously at this point that a long-range bomber needed to penetrate enemy airspace must be very stealthy ...



Deino said:


> YES ... faked and already posted a few pages ago.




Couldn't it be more obvious. The first photos we got of the J-20 were during taxiing tests, much less flying. I can't believe so many ppl cannot recognize these poor PS'ed photos .


----------



## Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA

H 10 shall be unveiled soon.....https://baijiahao.baidu.com/po/feed...From":"bjh","nid":"news_3322001564722538752"}
http://f12.baidu.com/it/u=395446216...100F080&w=352&h=240&img.JPEG&access=215967316


----------



## Deino

Adam wang said:


> H 10 shall be unveiled soon.....https://baijiahao.baidu.com/po/feed/share?wfr=spider&for=pc&context={"sourceFrom":"bjh","nid":"news_3322001564722538752"}
> http://f12.baidu.com/it/u=395446216...100F080&w=352&h=240&img.JPEG&access=215967316




Welcome back and I hope You take Your second chance. ! Upps, but I just noticed You did not (sorry to say so, but how stubborn and stupid is that !?? )


But again 2. points:

1. This is so clearly a FAKE, a bad one - a 3 year old child would notice that - and that type is never called H-10. 

2. This is the Y-20 thread, so why do You post it here esp. if there's a dedicated one for the H-X/H-20??


Sorry to say so, but if You want to continue here You need to learn a lot and better sooner than later. 
Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Welcome back and I hope You take Your second chance.
> 
> But again 2. point:
> 
> 1. This is so clearly a FAK, a bad one and that type is never called H-10.
> 
> 2. This is the Y-20 thread, so why do You post it here esp. if there's a dedicated one for the H-X/H-20??
> 
> Deino


This poorly done CG was posted in early 2013.


----------



## Deino

Adam wang said:


> at least I bring sth than those just bla bla bla,,,, ban me if u wt but i must say i do not respect ur authority .
> 
> AND DID I call u idiot, NO but u call me idiot, so. this is ur way to rule here=personal insult?
> 
> remember not every one is an military expert and if u wt this forum to be more interesting,u better allow people to talk,I know u gonna to say: off topic........leave..........LOL



Talk YES but don't talk BS and insults.
Hey; You came back after a ban due to trolling and insults and after no more than 15 minutes You got another two warnings resulting in another ban. If that is not idiotic I don't know what it is.

Consequently if You would calm down Your tone and improve Your behaviour and at least start posting something meaningful - instead of decades old fan-arts, plain stupid posts full of wrong designation even more in the wrong thread or insults - You could indeed have a chance to become a longer staying member here.

Otherwise ... ?! Welcome back anyway.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Members who pay attention can see this Adam wang persona regged here just to set the flame baits, disguised in the false flagging... *just follow its posts,* nothing serious, no contribution to board but only to create agitation and set fire and stir commotion to the forum  LOL

this persona is lucky if just banned two weeks, if let me do it, two months for the repeated strikes  repeat again, the permanent ban!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Watch those beautiful CGI of the coming H-20 at some TV show, accompanied by some familiar commentators!

Wonder which TV channel it's.

*China's New Long-Range Strategic Bomber H-20 is Coming
外媒预测轰-20即将首飞 即将成为解放军前所未有重磅杀手锏*
(Chinese commentary; sorry no Engsub)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Figaro

Any more updates to the rumors? Is the H-XX going to be unveiled this October as some suggest? We have yet to see any indication of the prototype that rolled out in late June ...


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> Any more updates to the rumors? Is the H-XX going to be unveiled this October as some suggest? We have yet to see any indication of the prototype that rolled out in late June ...



It's best to keep in mind that it took a full 8 months for the H-6N to show up *after its maiden flight*.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

SinoSoldier said:


> It's best to keep in mind that it took a full 8 months for the H-6N to show up *after its maiden flight*.


So it conducted its maiden flight back in January? Then is it possible that the H-XX has already conducted taxiing tests? That sounds interesting then ...


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> So it conducted its maiden flight back in January? Then is it possible that the H-XX has already conducted taxiing tests?



The H-6N conducted its maiden flight in December 2016, allegedly. Therefore, we might not be getting any photos of the H-XX for _quite_ a while.


----------



## Figaro

SinoSoldier said:


> The H-6N conducted its maiden flight in December 2016, allegedly. Therefore, we might not be getting any photos of the H-XX for _quite_ a while.


So you're saying that the H-XX may have already conducted its maiden flight without anybody noticing? Intriguing ... so much different than the J-20


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> So you're saying that the H-XX may have already conducted its maiden flight without anybody noticing? Intriguing ... so much different than the J-20



No. What I'm saying is that photos of these platforms usually appear a very long time after rollout or flight.

Doing a test flight of a B2-sized aircraft simply cannot escape prying camera lenses.


----------



## Figaro

SinoSoldier said:


> No. What I'm saying is that photos of these platforms usually appear a very long time after rollout or flight.


But was that the case with the J-20 though? We all knew it was unveiled to the public amid great fanfare ...


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> But was that the case with the J-20 though? We know it conducted its maiden flight in January of 2011 in front of a big audience



I think it varies by location. Back in 2011, CAC did not yet have a concrete wall erected around its perimeter.

But again, who knows. Transparency is on the rise and it's pretty much impossible to perform H-XX tests discreetly.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> No. What I'm saying is that photos of these platforms usually appear a very long time after rollout or flight.
> 
> Doing a test flight of a B2-sized aircraft simply cannot escape prying camera lenses.




Even more since a test-flight of yet another H-6-variant is surely not as noticeable as a new stealth bomber. I'm sure when that type will have its maiden flight we will surely know it.


----------



## grey boy 2



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Figaro

grey boy 2 said:


>


Can you please summarize it in English ... thanks. I can't read Chinese


----------



## grey boy 2

Figaro said:


> Can you please summarize it in English ... thanks. I can't read Chinese


It said after test flight many times, still afraid of 1 failure and won't disclose to the public until perfectly tested
So he posted this pictures to clarify its happening (test flights) even though he claimed PS picture (stay out of trouble for leaking)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

juj06750 said:


> deleted due to trolling


...


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> It said after test flight many times, still afraid of 1 failure and won't disclose to the public until perfectly tested
> So he posted this pictures to clarify its happening (test flights) even though he claimed PS picture (stay out of trouble for leaking)



Pardon, if I missed something but before some guys are again jumping on the bandwagon already. 

I know that these rumours are floating around since a few hours and even if some say that thing might indeed has done its maiden flight I don't think. A B-2-like flying wing taking off at Xi'an *MUST *have been noticed by some in the public.

Or am I wrong?

Deino


----------



## grey boy 2

Deino said:


> Pardon, if I missed something but before some guys are again jumping on the bandwagon already.
> 
> I know that these rumours are floating around since a few hours and even if some say that thing might indeed has done its maiden flight I don't think. A B-2-like flying wing taking off at Xi'an *MUST *have been noticed by some in the public.
> 
> Or am I wrong?
> 
> Deino


NO NO, you ain't wrong. nobody knew for sure now, we shall found out soon, in the mean time, if you don't mind, will keep posting what i found interesting, OK?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> NO NO, you ain't wrong. nobody knew for sure now, we shall found out soon, in the mean time, if you don't mind, will keep posting what i found interesting, OK?




Yes for sure ... please continue and do not STOP posting what You find interesting since even if I don't agree always, it's most interesting anyway and always helps to find out what's really going on!!! 

PS: Here's a very interesting pots by a senior member from the SDF:




by78 said:


> Let me give this another crack... But first some disclaimers: the text to me are unclear in some parts because it's colloquial, and the fact it starts out with a rhetorical question doesn't help. Also it seemed to be missing some crucial punctuation marks and conjunctions, which added to my confusion. I will add what I believe to be missing or implied in parentheses.
> 
> *So here it goes, begin translation:*
> 
> Countless test flights have already been carried out, yet we are still waiting for the first (official/public) flight. What is there to be afraid of? Perhaps a fear of embarrassment if the first public flight fails? The first official flight will not be announced to the public until everything is completely ironed out and is guaranteed to succeed. (Meanwhile), if the plane is spotted by netizens, (the military) will deny its existence by saying the witness has misidentified the plane and didn't see what he/she claims to have seen, (or) profess ignorance by pretending to not have heard anything about the plane being spotted, (or) state that there is no official information at this time and has no comment. Attached is a fake photo (to give you a clue on what kind of plane I'm talking about); I know it's a fake photo, so no need for you guys to point that out in the comment section.
> 
> *End translation.*
> 
> *To summarize:*
> 1) The *official *first flight of the stealth bomber will not be announced to the public until the PLAAF is certain that it will go smoothly. To that end, numerous *unofficial* test flights have already taken place and more will be carried out.
> 2) Should the bomber be spotted prematurely, the military will deny, obfuscate, or clam up.
> 3) The author never once explicitly stated what kind of plane he was talking about. Instead, he gave an unmistakable clue by posting a photo of the B-2 stealth bomber.
> 
> *End summary.*
> 
> Please correct any mistakes you see in my translation and interpretation and point out anything I have missed. It wouldn't surprise me if I have made serious errors in translation, so any correction is highly welcome.



But again I cannot believe that a B-2-like flying wing taking off at Xi'an went by unnoticed in the public.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> Yes for sure ... please continue and do not STOP posting what You find interesting since even if I don't agree always, it's most interesting anyway and always helps to find out what's really going on!!!
> 
> PS: Here's a very interesting pots by a senior member from the SDF:
> 
> 
> 
> *But again I cannot believe that a B-2-like flying wing taking off at Xi'an went by unnoticed in the public.*


But _if they really want to_ keep the test flights from the public views, they can opt to do the flights _*at the most unexpected timing*,_ incl. at the time when the sky is still dark (dawn may be the best), under heavy raining, under cover of the flight by other aircraft and combination of those measures and so on. As long as they can manage the internal staffs to keep silent then it's feasible!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

grey boy 2 said:


>


H-20, China B-2 stealth bomber is not a dream !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

cnleio said:


> H-20, China B-2 stealth bomber is not a dream !



It may not be a dream but that image is a B-2.


----------



## samsara

cnleio said:


> H-20, China B-2 stealth bomber is not a dream !
> 
> 
> View attachment 423909
> View attachment 423910


!
AWESOME!!! Look forward to seeing them conducting regular drills Deep in the WEST PACIFIC one day... perhaps within this decade!! 
China should know on how to return the so many favours quite cordially!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 星海军事

Why are we paying so much attention to someone's fantasy?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## samsara

星海军事 said:


> Why are we paying so much attention to someone's fantasy?


I cannot tell about others but for sure I have such deep fantasy, so deep that I have been carrying it with me for over twenty years at least... started reading about the world in 80s even encountered often the phrase "The Sickman from Asia; The Bamboo Curtain; The Sleeping Giant"... rolled over to the days seeing the many "staged noisy shows" incl. the giant birds conducted often the drills near the backyards... and now just imagine that China can return the favours at one fine day.... isn't it terrific?  Then Fantasies become Realities! And it just takes less than one's own lifetime to witness all these changes (and honestly not something that I ever imagined back then... in the early 80s).
Words alone may be very tough to depict the deep-seated feeling...    I simply look forward the days to return all kinds of favours to those kind parties.... at least for courtesy calls,,,, if you do stage "noisy shows" near to my compound then please allow me to stage the same ones near yours... on reciprocal basis!!! Fair enough?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 星海军事

It is the carrier-based AEW/transport aircraft of 603 Institute rather than the LRSB which deserves special attention right now. I suggest starting a new thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IblinI

星海军事 said:


> It is the carrier-based AEW/transport aircraft of 603 Institute rather than the LRSB which deserves special attention right now. I suggest starting a new thread.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> It is the carrier-based AEW/transport aircraft of 603 Institute rather than the LRSB which deserves special attention right now. I suggest starting a new thread.



So, all of the recent talk of a new aircraft at XAC is referring to the new AEW aircraft rather than a bomber?


----------



## IblinI

SinoSoldier said:


> So, all of the recent talk of a new aircraft at XAC is referring to the new AEW aircraft rather than a bomber?


I think he was saying the LRSB isn't going to make its maiden flight any soon, so before that we have the AEW aircraft to look at.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daniel808

SinoSoldier said:


> So, all of the recent talk of a new aircraft at XAC is referring to the new AEW aircraft rather than a bomber?



No, he mean we will see new AEW aircraft maiden flight sooner than H-20 Stealth Bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

星海军事 said:


> It is the carrier-based AEW/transport aircraft of 603 Institute rather than the LRSB which deserves special attention right now. I suggest starting a new thread.



Please go ahead here:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/plan-dedicated-carrier-borne-aew-thread-kj-600.516955/

"Right now" in the meaning of months ? Weeks or even days???


----------



## grey boy 2

Major message from big shrimp: Once the rain stop, "H-20 stealth bomber with indigenous engines test flight" begin?
天下雨————轰炸机 (Bomber)?
山入云————航发投用(engines ready)?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## cnleio

grey boy 2 said:


> Major message from big shrimp: Once the rain stop, "H-20 stealth bomber with indigenous engines test flight" begin?
> 天下雨————轰炸机 (Bomber)?
> 山入云————航发投用(engines ready)?


Last time i heard some rumor said end year of 2017 we can see H-20 prototype out ... i think it will come soon

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> Major message from big shrimp: Once the rain stop, "H-20 stealth bomber with indigenous engines test flight" begin?
> 天下雨————轰炸机 (Bomber)?
> 山入云————航发投用(engines ready)?



So there is rain at Xian righ now?
Here at Munich airport the weather is perfect ... Preparing to fly to Nantes right that moment. 






So keep me updated ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Any new reports of the H-XX? What is it's status? The alleged October maiden flight is coming closer and closer ...


----------



## yusheng

for reference：

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

yusheng said:


> for reference：



To admit I deem these all highly unlikely and unrealistic. Why should the H-20 feature three weapon bays? The B-1 has two, the B-2 also, not even the B-21 will have three?!

It's a waste of internal volume more urgently needed for fuel in order to archive a decent range.

I realyl don't know why these fan boys always want to have more, longer, larger, wider?? 
The same with this stupid discussion on 112 vs 128 VL-cells on the 055.

Anyway I'm eager for the first real images ...

Deino


----------



## 21stCentury

I wonder how many different long-range stealth bombers they are building. If ifs anything like the J-20 and J-31 programs, then there will be at least 2. Can't wait to see

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

21stCentury said:


> I wonder how many different long-range stealth bombers they are building. If ifs anything like the J-20 and J-31 programs, then there will be at least 2. Can't wait to see



I think one for sure; namely the H-XX/H-20 and so the question is, which one of the first three configurations shown is the most likely one?

Concerning the supersonic-capable regional bomber JH-XX/H-XY or H-18 I'm inclined to say it is most likely no longer an active project ... if it ever was.

Deino


----------



## Figaro

21stCentury said:


> I wonder how many different long-range stealth bombers they are building. If ifs anything like the J-20 and J-31 programs, then there will be at least 2. Can't wait to see


I seriously doubt that XAC would dish out multiple long range stealth bomber designs. It would divert resources and at the end be pretty counterproductive. Also, you have to remember that the FC-31 was a privately funded effort by SAC due to their tender loss. Currently, the prospects of the FC-31 joining the PLAAF or PLANAF are very remote and getting less by the day. Hence, China really only has one "real" or "full-fledged" 5th generation fighter program ... and that is the J-20.


----------



## F-7




----------



## Ultima Thule

F-7 said:


>


this thread is for up coming H-X/H-20 not for H-6 series of bomber read the title of this thread


----------



## Deino

@F-7 

Please don’t take this as an offense but all videos you were posting this morning were either old and dated or placed in the wrong thread. Please take care you post in the correct thread and if it was already posted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Any news on the H-X ... or even more on this "soon to be unveiled J-20-unveiling-equal event" that was announced to happen in December?

Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Any news on the H-X ... or even more on this "soon to be unveiled J-20-unveiling-equal event" that was announced to happen in December?
> 
> Deino


The J-20 equal event was most likely the J-10 ground test with the new WS-10 or WS-15 TVC variant. Given that it is ground testing, I doubt that we'll be getting images shortly ...


----------



## cnleio



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Otherwise no news?


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

cnleio said:


> View attachment 446889


This is not a credible stealth bomber design because the wingtips aren't planform aligned. Take a look at the B-2's wingtips:




See how all the edges are parallel?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Only a fan art, but a nice one 






I wouldn't complain if the real one would look like this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 艹艹艹

Development C&P said:


> just may be the case：
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 独龙？DuLoong?……
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> W!T!F!!!
> Turned out to be so sci-fi!!!
> Really？？！


就是它！！！！

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

long_ said:


> 就是它！！！！



"That's is!!!!" .... I hope not. 

A design with three engines, not-aligned angles everywhere.... please NOT.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shadows888

Deino said:


> "That's is!!!!" .... I hope not.
> 
> A design with three engines, not-aligned angles everywhere.... please NOT.



advanced spacecraft, it doesn't follow physics!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 艹艹艹

*H-20 doesn't exist at all.*


----------



## Deino

long_ said:


> *H-20 doesn't exist at all.*




So let's call it H-X or "strategic project" or whatever ?... or does these also not exist?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

SingaporeGuy said:


> ...
> Highly doubt china will build any.
> ...



But what about the PLAAF Commander in Chief's statement?


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> But what about the PLAAF Commander in Chief's statement?



Maybe he said about the new version of H-6. Don't you remember that shortly after he said about the new long range bomber, a new H-6 variant was disclosed to public? Like it or not, but the new Chinese H-6 can also be called as Long Range Bomber. That PLAAF commander didn't say about "Stealth Bomber". He said about "a new long range bomber".


----------



## Akasa

Brainsucker said:


> Maybe he said about the new version of H-6. Don't you remember that shortly after he said about the new long range bomber, a new H-6 variant was disclosed to public? Like it or not, but the new Chinese H-6 can also be called as Long Range Bomber. That PLAAF commander didn't say about "Stealth Bomber". He said about "a new long range bomber".



The fact that they've done CAD models of the bomber's various components shows that they're serious about this project. It may not fly soon, but the chances are that it will sooner or later.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Brainsucker said:


> Maybe he said about the new version of H-6. Don't you remember that shortly after he said about the new long range bomber, a new H-6 variant was disclosed to public? Like it or not, but the new Chinese H-6 can also be called as Long Range Bomber. That PLAAF commander didn't say about "Stealth Bomber". He said about "a new long range bomber".


Nope. He clearly meant a new generation of bomber, as in stealth bomber. A new H-6 iteration definitely doesn't constitute that criteria. Given Chinese experience with stealth shaping/material on the J-20, I don't see why a stealth bomber is out of reach.
*“We are now developing a new generation of long-range bomber, and you’ll see it in the future,” Ma said, according to the paper, without elaborating.*
There's only so much you can squeeze out of an almost 70 year old design ...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...g-new-type-of-long-range-bomber-idUSKCN11809E



SingaporeGuy said:


> America's b2 bombers are practically hangar gods.
> 
> Highly doubt china will build any.
> 
> missiles will do the trick


The funny thing is rumors point to the exact opposite. Chinese academic papers have pointed to a design pretty similar to the B-2/B-21 in terms of RCS. The reason why B-2's are "hangar gods" is because of poor project management, leading to huge cost overruns, and the fact that the B-2 was too advanced for its time. It is now 2018, not 1988 ... given the large success of the J-20 project, I don't think China will encounter too many issues.


----------



## Brainsucker

Figaro said:


> Nope. He clearly meant a new generation of bomber, as in stealth bomber. A new H-6 iteration definitely doesn't constitute that criteria. Given Chinese experience with stealth shaping/material on the J-20, I don't see why a stealth bomber is out of reach.
> *“We are now developing a new generation of long-range bomber, and you’ll see it in the future,” Ma said, according to the paper, without elaborating.*
> There's only so much you can squeeze out of an almost 70 year old design ...
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...g-new-type-of-long-range-bomber-idUSKCN11809E



Well, only the PLAAF Commander know what he means with a new generation of long range bomber. We can only interpret. I think that the new long range bomber was the new H-6. But maybe I'm wrong. And you can wrong too. Just wait and see.


----------



## Figaro

Brainsucker said:


> Well, only the PLAAF Commander know what he means with a new generation of long range bomber. We can only interpret. I think that the new long range bomber was the new H-6. But maybe I'm wrong. And you can wrong too. Just wait and see.


I am pretty certain that the new bomber is not going to be a H-6 variant. Ma clearly stated "a *new generation* of long-range bomber" ... how does a H-6 variant constitute a new generation??? We've been hearing rumors and leaks of a stealth bomber from XAC for a while now ... so this is the closest thing we have to official confirmation. And once again, how much can the PLAAF squeeze out of an aging 70 year old design? It would simply be illogical for the PLAAF not to make a stealth bomber given their experiences with the J-20 and Y-20 ... at this point, the H-6K probably represents the evolutionary peak of the H-6.


----------



## 52051

Figaro said:


> Nope. He clearly meant a new generation of bomber, as in stealth bomber. A new H-6 iteration definitely doesn't constitute that criteria. Given Chinese experience with stealth shaping/material on the J-20, I don't see why a stealth bomber is out of reach.
> *“We are now developing a new generation of long-range bomber, and you’ll see it in the future,” Ma said, according to the paper, without elaborating.*
> There's only so much you can squeeze out of an almost 70 year old design ...
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...g-new-type-of-long-range-bomber-idUSKCN11809E
> 
> 
> The funny thing is rumors point to the exact opposite. Chinese academic papers have pointed to a design pretty similar to the B-2/B-21 in terms of RCS. The reason why B-2's are "hangar gods" is because of poor project management, leading to huge cost overruns, and the fact that the B-2 was too advanced for its time. It is now 2018, not 1988 ... given the large success of the J-20 project, I don't think China will encounter too many issues.



B-2 dont have as much cost overuns as media try to put it the way.

The so-called $2.2 billion unit price for B-2 is including programm cost, the actual fly-away cost for B-2 is $750million or so, about 2.8 X of the cost of B-1B. Not bad a price to have a revoluationary generation of bombers in 1980s, and with today's tech, the price should go further down.

The only reason B-2 become a problem is at the end of cold war, the US suddenly find no opponents in the forseeable future(partially thanks to the general ignorance and China's intentional disinformation), and terminated many weapon promgrams, they have made many mistakes, like terminate F-22 in favor of F-35, stupid LCS and Zuma whatever ships instead of warships in the high sea, and cut orders of B-2 is the lesser of errors.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Can we stay on topic ?? ... neither is Singapore and its aviation industry nor any other country-rivalry relevant to this topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr

H-20 hangar 







One always needs to plan ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> H-20 hangar
> 
> View attachment 449824
> 
> 
> One always needs to plan ahead.



No evidence for this

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## clarkgap

CAIC - Probably the scale model of H-20?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

clarkgap said:


> CAIC - Probably the scale model of H-20?
> 
> View attachment 452154




In my opinion more likely a revised Sharp Sword UCAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> In my opinion more likely a revised Sharp Sword UCAV.



Looks too small to be the Sharp Sword


----------



## Deino

Akasa said:


> Looks too small to be the Sharp Sword




Agreed ... and it was spotted at the wrong site. Sharp Sword is built by SAC/601 and Hongdu, this was taken at CAC/611.


----------



## cirr

The latest rumour is that the H-20 is about a year from coming to light.

True or false?


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

cirr said:


> The latest rumour is that the H-20 is about a year from coming to light.
> 
> True or false?





True!

Given the new agressive US nuclear strategy... I bet that the PLA has moved gears upwards.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if H20 is in very advanced stages of development. Sub-systems have been available for sometime now.

Just have a look at the overall defence production and innovations-going-public (railgun being the latest). 

SSNs/SSBNs are all coming online at a rapid pace. Rate of production of ACVs... and 055 are just but an indications of the level of technolgoical breakthroughs achieved by China.

As always China's strategy has been and still is of deterence.

Besides China is still a decade behind in overall defence modernisation. But this is now changing faster than before...all thanks to the troublemakers agressive policies and behaviour.

As you and other Chiense friends here know very well... China only announces weapon systems in public which are two generations behind to the actual technological capabilities of China.

So, yeah... it is True..and I am not surprised at all... I would be if it is not so.

Keep us posted, dear friend!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> The latest rumour is that the H-20 is about a year from coming to light.
> 
> True or false?



That's actually quite a long time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

H-20 stealth Bomber?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## clarkgap

BHarwana said:


> H-20 stealth Bomber?
> 
> View attachment 452990



An old PS image.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BHarwana

@clarkgap here check this link

http://www.chappers-cbj.com/aviation/has-chinas-elusive-h-20-stealth-bomber-broken-light/


----------



## clarkgap

BHarwana said:


> @clarkgap here check this link
> 
> http://www.chappers-cbj.com/aviation/has-chinas-elusive-h-20-stealth-bomber-broken-light/



CBJ News - “Student Broadcast Journalist with an interest in aviation/ military (defence) journalism”

According to official report, the H-20 project was approved in 2014. So we will not see the prototype in 2018.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

Milestone achieved, milestone achieved?！

Wishing you all a happy, healthy and prosperous Chinese New Year.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> Milestone achieved, milestone achieved?！
> 
> Wishing you all a happy, healthy and prosperous Chinese New Year.



Unless this "milestone" is prototype rollout or maiden flight, it's not worth mentioning. Anyways, Happy Chinese New Year!


----------



## Deino

... said to be related to the H-XX/H-20 ???






https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2458964-1-1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## clarkgap

Deino said:


> ... said to be related to the H-XX/H-20 ???
> 
> View attachment 453750
> 
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2458964-1-1.html



Someone think the fly-wing aircraft in top center of screen is H-20. But I think they may download a H-20 CG from internet to create the power-point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyperion

That surely doesn't look like an old ps image. Post a link. Some of the details are just way too much for PS.


clarkgap said:


> An old PS image.


----------



## 52051

clarkgap said:


> Someone think the fly-wing aircraft in top center of screen is H-20. But I think they may download a H-20 CG from internet to create the power-point.



If there were an internal meeting in 603, then, unless the PPT creator want to piss their bosses off, they wont use some random CG there, especially put it on top of many real projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Feng Leng

Deino said:


> ... said to be related to the H-XX/H-20 ???
> 
> View attachment 453750
> 
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2458964-1-1.html


The moderators on CJDBY deleted the thread very fast. Usually if they want to censor discussion they lock the thread (it disappears from the main page but the link can still be accessed). This thread was not locked but deleted.

I believe this is the genuine, bona fide thing. It is not a flying wing!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Feng Leng said:


> The moderators on CJDBY deleted the thread very fast. Usually if they want to censor discussion they lock the thread (it disappears from the main page but the link can still be accessed). This thread was not locked but deleted.
> 
> I believe this is the genuine, bona fide thing. It is not a flying wing!



But to admit I don't rate this illustration reliable. A bomber with three engines, not a single aligned edge and a cockpit below a huge intake ... it contradicts everything we know otherwise about the H-XX's configuration or stealth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Feng Leng

Deino said:


> But to admit I don't rate this illustration reliable. A bomber with three engines, not a single aligned edge and a cockpit below a huge intake ... it contradicts everything we know otherwise about the H-XX's configuration or stealth.


The image shown in the PPT is quite blurry. The other circulated illustration that looks comparable to the PPT image is this one:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 52051

Feng Leng said:


> The image shown in the PPT is quite blurry. The other circulated illustration that looks comparable to the PPT image is this one:


Look like this one

This is a stealth and supersonic bomber that is replacing H-6, the project is in parallel with a B-2-size like long range bomber

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ultima Thule

52051 said:


> Look like this one
> 
> This is a stealth and supersonic bomber that is replacing H-6, the project is in parallel with a B-2-size like long range bomber


I have to say its like a stealth regional bomber rether than a strategic bomber with a global reach



Feng Leng said:


> The image shown in the PPT is quite blurry. The other circulated illustration that looks comparable to the PPT image is this one:
> I have to say itslike a stealth regional bomber rether than a strategic bomber with a global reach


----------



## 52051

pakistanipower said:


> I have to say its like a stealth regional bomber rether than a strategic bomber with a global reach



Exactly, it is the Tu-26 backfire in our time.

And besides, China has subsonic strategic bomber under R&D as well, just separate project.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 52051

Figaro said:


> Isn’t this concept the H-18 ... which was disproved by numerous Big Shrimps? I would be very surprised if China had two simultaneous projects ... all I’ve heard was a stealth subsonic design



It has not disproved, there is a model on the airshow about that, and there is rumor says that this proposal from 601 lose to other proposal in 603, the main reason is, if the proposal is selected, it would not be shown in public, but actually the reason is flawed, since many PLA induced weapons has appear in various airshow before.

And PLA actually has two different next-gen bomber projects:

One is a supersonic medium range bomber which replace H-6, you can think it as a Tu-26 "backfire" kind of thing.

The other is a B-2 like subsonic strategic bomber which will be much heavier.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Akasa

52051 said:


> Look like this one
> 
> This is a stealth and supersonic bomber that is replacing H-6, the project is in parallel with a B-2-size like long range bomber



And you know this how?


----------



## Deino

Feng Leng said:


> The moderators on CJDBY deleted the thread very fast. Usually if they want to censor discussion they lock the thread (it disappears from the main page but the link can still be accessed). This thread was not locked but deleted.
> 
> I believe this is the genuine, bona fide thing. It is not a flying wing!




Now I know where this stupid fan art for the H-XX is from ! 

It's actually image "21" in an academic paper on "Flight Control Law Design and Flight Test for Small Flying Wing Aircraft" written by Ma Wen, Zhang Ning, Ma Rong, Chen Xiaolong, Zhang Yixuan (_AVIC Xi_’_an Flight Automatic Control Research Institute_, _Xi_’_an _710065, _China_) published in December 2015.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 52051

Akasa said:


> And you know this how?



Same as the rumor of H-20, actually SAC have even show the model off.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

52051 said:


> Same as the rumor of H-20, actually SAC have even show the model off.



Who leaked the initial rumor? Is that person reliable?


----------



## 52051

Akasa said:


> Who leaked the initial rumor? Is that person reliable?



Cannot remeber exact, but it is since long time ago, about the time SAC show that famous medium range bomber model in public.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

52051 said:


> Cannot remeber exact, but it is since long time ago, about the time SAC show that famous medium range bomber model in public.



Yes, we've seen the model. However, even that doesn't mean that the project is still under development.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

Akasa said:


> Yes, we've seen the model. However, even that doesn't mean that the project is still under development.



Nor we have evidence show it is not

Actually we only have evidence that there is, at least once, a medium weight bomber project recently.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Stealth Bomber will be a nightmare for India, with a devastating load of weapon, it will be an *air second artillery and force multiplier to support border troops within 20 min. timeline,* a massive formation of 10 bombers will literally flatten any Indian mountain divisions and dig a huge un-obstructed path for PLA to mount the offensive. The mobility and range of these bombers can virtual attack any weak Indian defense all alone of Sino-India border.

The good thing of such baby is stealthy and that the airbase will be out of Indian air strike such as Chengdu therefore the survivability of this toy will be very high. We shall have an unfaire advantage over India regardless how many troops India will put on the border...with such valuable strategic advantage of using the bomber over India, it will be very stupid not to develop it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cybernetics

Aerospace Knowledge magazine, May 2018 edition. "中国迈向20军团"








http://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1597101963382746381

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

Cybernetics said:


> Aerospace Knowledge magazine, May 2018 edition. "中国迈向20军团"
> View attachment 464605



But as far as I know this is NOT the H-20 but an alleged project sometimes called H-18 and I must admit I'm a bit surprised to see it again after all the time. 

I remember that there was once a time long, long ago, when we were quite sure that at least such a project was real ...

What do they say now??
Any info on what's its status now? I


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> But as far as I know this is NOT the H-20 but an alleged project sometimes called H-18 and I must admit I'm a bit surprised to see it again after all the time.
> 
> I remember that there was once a time long, long ago, when we were quite sure that at least such a project was real ...
> 
> What do they say now??
> Any info on what's its status now? I


It might just be a placeholder illustration ... nothing substantive. I don’t think it shows the H-18 project is still ongoing ...


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> But as far as I know this is NOT the H-20 but an alleged project sometimes called H-18 and I must admit I'm a bit surprised to see it again after all the time.
> 
> I remember that there was once a time long, long ago, when we were quite sure that at least such a project was real ...
> 
> What do they say now??
> Any info on what's its status now? I


Top secret

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 艹艹艹



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BERKEKHAN2

Cybernetics said:


> Aerospace Knowledge magazine, May 2018 edition. "中国迈向20军团"
> View attachment 464605
> 
> View attachment 464606
> 
> http://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1597101963382746381


Does it have English version ??


----------



## Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Dante80

So...is that thing legit? Surely it cannot be a strategic bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Dante80 said:


> So...is that thing legit? Surely it cannot be a strategic bomber.


These are all fan art or concept models. I don't think they're legit ... a program so high profile surely wouldn't get leaked like this.



Deino said:


> But as far as I know this is NOT the H-20 but an alleged project sometimes called H-18 and I must admit I'm a bit surprised to see it again after all the time.
> 
> I remember that there was once a time long, long ago, when we were quite sure that at least such a project was real ...
> 
> What do they say now??
> Any info on what's its status now? I


This illustration does not provide any evidence that the H-18 supersonic bomber is alive and well. It is most likely just the product of the author's artistic mind. I wouldn't place too much emphasis ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hammad ur Rehman

I think China is working on 2 bomber projects, 1 blended wing long range subsonic intercontinental strategic bomber & 2 a medium range supersonic tactical bomber to go upto 2nd island chain.

TB will be used for AA/AD & to keep the threatening navies carriers far away while the SB can be used to reach other continents.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

Dante80 said:


> So...is that thing legit? Surely it cannot be a strategic bomber.



Fan art. Looks like a mix of F-23 and this. 




Still cool looking.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Feng Leng said:


> It's pretty much an open secret now. There are actually two projects.





Feng Leng said:


> The first flight may have already taken place. ...



To admit I would like to calm down your enthusiasm: So far NOTHING is confirmed, all we have are rumours, art-works and this model ... as well as some overenthusiastic fans, who take such a model as proof for an already close to operational super-secret stealth bomber.

I prefer to wait for more facts....




pakistanipower said:


> Can't tell from this angle (side on view) just my guess @Deino sir



IMO it is ... just look and estimate: if it is indeed for a Su-34-sized aircraft that cockpit would be much too narrow. If you look closely it even has only one seat, whereas the Su-34 has two side by side.

Therefore it is either for something different - since it would not make sense to put such a new single-seat cockpit on a Flanker or it is a sub-scale section of a much larger type, maybe that regional bomber sometimes labelled JH-XX or H-18 and the second seat is not visible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video






http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## jaybird

cirr said:


> Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0



Even though is just 3D promotion screen grab for now. I wanted to scream "TAKE IT OFF!"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0




That's most interesting since it looks very much the same way one the USAF promoted the new B-21.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cybernetics

cirr said:


> Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0


This officially confirms the existence and ongoing nature of the flying wing H-XX program.

If the picture is accurate then it doesn't look like a B2 type flying wing. What looks like the engine intakes are placed closer to the centre line than the B2 design.





It looks more like the star shadow stealth drone. The plane also has a change in sweep angle of the wings just like the stealth drone.









Maybe similar to this design

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jaybird

That's why Deino said this 3D video screen grab looks like B-21 one done by the U.S awhile back. I'm not sure if the 3D artist is trolling B-21 or in fact accurate. Here is both Top supposedly future H-20? Bottom is B-21.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

jaybird said:


> That's why Deino said this 3D video screen grab looks like B-21 one done by the U.S awhile back. I'm not sure if the 3D artist is trolling B-21 or in fact accurate. Here is both Top supposedly future H-20? Bottom is B-21.
> View attachment 472722



Exactly my point and thanks for finding and posting this image ... I wasn't able to find it so quickly.

Thanks 

Deino



cirr said:


> Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0



Again me since the similarities are that great so that some surely again will cry "copy"... how official is this video (I cannot open that link)??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr

Deino said:


> Exactly my point and thanks for finding and posting this image ... I wasn't able to find it so quickly.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> 
> Again me since the similarities are that great so that some surely again will cry "copy"... how official is this video (I cannot open that link)??



100% official.(At the very end of the video clip)

http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/mediafile/pic/video/2018/05/08/a973a15a8b8d4a1cb2e4d5e4f02ab2bd.mp4

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> 100% official.
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/mediafile/pic/video/2018/05/08/a973a15a8b8d4a1cb2e4d5e4f02ab2bd.mp4



Thanks ... unfortunately I wasn't able to see it; but now I can: Thanks a lot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

cirr said:


> Screen grab from AVIC's latest 3D promotion video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://defenseimg.81.cn/data/static/2018/05/08/1168_9687.html?from=singlemessage&isappinstalled=0



Is it this one ... ??


----------



## LKJ86

HRK said:


> Is it this one ... ??
> View attachment 472741


No, it is B-2.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 帅的一匹

Its pretty much sure that we have a stealthy bomber project under development.

YangWei is a genius, one of its kind.

YangWei is a genius, one of its kind.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Adam WANG SHANGHAI MEGA




----------



## Figaro

jaybird said:


> That's why Deino said this 3D video screen grab looks like B-21 one done by the U.S awhile back. I'm not sure if the 3D artist is trolling B-21 or in fact accurate. Here is both Top supposedly future H-20? Bottom is B-21.
> View attachment 472722


If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Cybernetics

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...
> View attachment 472953


I think its due to marketing being done in house, likely by engineers. 

Keeping traditions alive




https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2473553-6-1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Jlaw

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...
> View attachment 472953


What PR department? Teens can come up with better PR than those Party nerds

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MReynolds

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...



I see the "ripoff" as a form of trolling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...
> View attachment 472953


I have always wanted to start a thread about these epic PR fails.



MReynolds said:


> I see the "ripoff" as a form of trolling.


This is China, not Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## leapx

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...
> View attachment 472953


感谢老天我们还有自干五，民宣部和御用摄影师

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

If it will look like this I won't complain

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Deino said:


> If it will look like this I won't complain
> 
> View attachment 473004


Too many angles. Stealth compromised.



星海军事 said:


> This is China, not Russia


So? That doesn't mean China should never troll.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 星海军事

ZeEa5KPul said:


> So? That doesn't mean China should never troll.


Well, what's the meaning of trolling B-21? Did we build anything comparable? Actually, we haven't ever developed any bomber fully independently.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

星海军事 said:


> Well, what's the meaning of trolling B-21?


Getting the message to America that it's not the only bully on the block.


星海军事 said:


> Did we build anything comparable?


Yes, and it's about to be unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

ZeEa5KPul said:


> ...
> Yes, and it's about to be unveiled.



Pardon to be sceptical or at least by nit-picking pedantic: So far it is not proven built and how soon is soon has to be seen.

At least for me "something comparable is" only built as comparable when that new type is in service.


----------



## samsara

Some one uploaded following nice clip, combining the CNN/Northrop Grumman and AVIC teaser clips 

*China's Long-range Strategic Stealth Bomber H-20 Teases B-21 (May 2018)*





_Fast forward to AVIC'S H-20 Teaser *6:55*_

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Deino said:


> Pardon to be sceptical or at least by nit-picking pedantic: So far it is not proven built and how soon is soon has to be seen.
> 
> At least for me "something comparable is" only built as comparable when that new type is in service.


There's nothing to be skeptical about, a B-2 class bomber is demonstrably within China's current technological capability. It has more than sufficient computational resources - far more than the US had in the 1980's when the B-2 was designed - and experience with stealth shaping and coating from the J-20 (experience the US did not have when it was developing the B-2). For engines, China is known to have the WS-10, a non-afterburning variant of which is likeliest to be used on the H-20.

As for soon, we have the AVIC teaser and the quote from General Ma Xiaotian - so it's not something like the WS-15, this is something we will see shortly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

ZeEa5KPul said:


> There's nothing to be skeptical about, a B-2 class bomber is demonstrably within China's current technological capability. It has more than sufficient computational resources - far more than the US had in the 1980's when the B-2 was designed - and experience with stealth shaping and coating from the J-20 (experience the US did not have when it was developing the B-2). For engines, China is known to have the WS-10, a non-afterburning variant of which is likeliest to be used on the H-20.
> 
> As for soon, we have the AVIC teaser and the quote from General Ma Xiaotian - so it's not something like the WS-15, this is something we will see shortly.



I completely agree with you in all point ... only with the conclusion that I prefer to wait until it is indeed unveiled.

By the way, any guess how "soon" this soon could be?


----------



## rcrmj

Deino said:


> I completely agree with you in all point ... only with the conclusion that I prefer to wait until it is indeed unveiled.
> 
> By the way, any guess how "soon" this soon could be?


Xian has been working on this stealth bomber for like 9 years```no "rumors" of the "show" day from the circle yet````


----------



## LKJ86

Figaro said:


> If there is one aspect of the PLA sorely lacking behind even less developed militaries, it has got to be their PR. Does it kill to have a *slightly* different video unveiling rather than a direct ripoff? I think these PR guys may be the same guys who butchered the PLAN anniversary picture last year. These guys need to be fired ...
> View attachment 472953


----------



## MReynolds

LKJ86 said:


> ...


It would be nice if you could post a translation.


----------



## 帅的一匹

星海军事 said:


> Well, what's the meaning of trolling B-21? Did we build anything comparable? Actually, we haven't ever developed any bomber fully independently.


This is not trolling, this is plain aggressive.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

星海军事 said:


> Well, what's the meaning of trolling B-21? Did we build anything comparable? Actually, we haven't ever developed any bomber fully independently.


I feel it's extremely weird in observing your many posts over an extended period, that even though your user ID is in Chinese characters, but your posts seem to DISPARAGE the Chinese Military achievements, talk it down from time to time, until it's becoming something undeniably clear and not possible to refute further.... Something akin to the J-20.

I wonder who are you really  in the sense where do you come from? *Some one from within Mainland China or from outside??? *



You just remind me of a member with such cool ID "_sinosoldier_", being less active here but quite active at SDF, still he's keeping on watching closely at PDF at this column and often ask lots of investigative questions  seems to behave normally —merely a netizen with an avid interests for Chinese Military— but actually maintaining a very negative, anti-China mindset (though he wrapped up his words as a staunch anti-CCP actually).

So, back to your posts, I find it really weird to see only the negative nuances [I call it negative biases]... from someone who uses the Chinese characters as his ID thus associates closely with the Chineseness...  And for sure I don't come into this thinking from this single post of yours, as said, from many over an extended period, therefore there's a clear pattern.

Anything I do miss here?  Just wondering... out of curiosity

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ultima Thule

Deino said:


> View attachment 473629


look like it will have 2 engine


----------



## Dante80

Deino said:


> View attachment 473629



That is another fan art project, yes?

ps: The AVIC H-20 teaser is probably CGI too (judging from the curtain folds, it looks mirrored).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

at least four engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

samsara said:


> I feel it's extremely weird in observing your many posts over an extended period, that even though your user ID is in Chinese characters, but your posts seem to DISPARAGE the Chinese Military achievements, talk it down from time to time, until it's becoming something undeniably clear and not possible to refute further.... Something akin to the J-20.



Telling the truth is not disparaging.

Obsessed with fantasies might be one of our unfavorable natures. Exaggerating past achievements, overestimating ourselves and underestimating others also let us make bad judgments.



samsara said:


> So, back to your posts, I find it really weird to see only the negative nuances [I call it negative biases]... from someone who uses the Chinese characters as his ID thus associates closely with the Chineseness...  And for sure I don't come into this thinking from this single post of yours, as said, from many over an extended period, therefore there's a clear pattern.
> 
> Anything I do miss here?  Just wondering... out of curiosity



Good judgment helps you deduce more information from limited clues. However, the more you know, the less you talk, vice versa.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## lcloo

samsara said:


> You just remind me of a member with such cool ID "_sinosoldier_", being less active here but quite active at SDF, still he's keeping on watching closely at PDF at this column and often ask lots of investigative questions  seems to behave normally —merely a netizen with an avid interests for Chinese Military— but actually maintaining a very negative, anti-China mindset (though he wrapped up his words as a staunch anti-CCP actually).



sinosoldier is still very active here, he merely changed his id to "Akasa", with 2 Canadian flags.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## conworldus

I think the H20 thread needs to be made sticky. Mod?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

星海军事 said:


> I have always wanted to start a thread about these epic PR fails.



Like this one?

https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2475043-1-1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

lcloo said:


> sinosoldier is still very active here, he merely changed his id to "Akasa", with 2 Canadian flags.


My goodness, no wonder I sensed the same pattern of behaviours and attitudes.... Quite curious, very investigative...
But I Just learn it from your post.

And I feel greatly amazed WHY an old time member here changed his nick when his existing one is not banned??? Or maintain some duality or even more forum personas... and the known IDs all come with the senior ratings  ,,,, what immense efforts being poured in to attain those levels. But What for indeed?? 

@星海军事 okay fair enough, I can see your explanation, though not necessarily I shall agree with what you take. Just for the sake of clarity, myself is far from fantasizing, for basically I am a realist pragmatist, as well as not favouring to go beyond what I know... Both deliberate underrating and overrating are not my cup of tea. And I am patient enough to wait the hard outcomes over time…

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

MReynolds said:


> It would be nice if you could post a translation.



The photo compare the Chinese Navy and South Vietnam Navy back in 1970s.

Under the ship it said

"Chinese Mine Sweeper 300 - 500 tons" and "South Vietnam US made destroyer, 1500 to 2000 tons"


----------



## 星海军事

Deino said:


> Like this one?
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2475043-1-1.html



That's right, but could you start a new thread for that? Thanks.


----------



## LKJ86

星海军事 said:


> That's right, but could you start a new thread for that? Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Oldman1

Deino said:


> View attachment 473629



Thats a cool looking design.


----------



## 52051

There are rumors from multiple sources around in China's military themed BBS for a while: It seems that SAC/601 have been developing a stealth fighter-bomber that aiming at replacing J/H-7 and Su-30 fleet, and the fighter-bomber is about to take maiden flight.

The fighter-bomber will have similiar capability/role like F-111 or Su-34, so no Tu-26-like bomber.

It seems that this is SAC/601's first priority project that much more likely to recieve orders from PLAAF/PLAN, instead of their FC-31 which still find no customers.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 帅的一匹

52051 said:


> There are rumors from multiple sources around in China's military themed BBS for a while: It seems that SAC/601 have been developing a stealth fighter-bomber that aiming at replacing J/H-7 and Su-30 fleet, and the fighter-bomber is about to take maiden flight.
> 
> The fighter-bomber will have similiar capability/role like F-111 or Su-34, so no Tu-26-like bomber.
> 
> It seems that this is SAC/601's first priority project that much more likely to recieve orders from PLAAF/PLAN, instead of their FC-31 which still find no customers.


A dedicated stealthy medium range bomber.

Much Faster than H6K, maybe less payload.

A very good initiative by SAC.

The name is JH17

The project is totally a surprise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Interesting CG

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Akasa

52051 said:


> and the fighter-bomber is about to take maiden flight



I'd like to see some links, please. Without credible sources, these claims are as good as hot air.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

LKJ86 said:


> Interesting CG
> View attachment 475830
> View attachment 475831
> View attachment 475832
> View attachment 475833
> View attachment 475834
> View attachment 475835



Nice, I like this audacious design.


----------



## 52051

Akasa said:


> I'd like to see some links, please. Without credible sources, these claims are as good as hot air.



In terms of achieve something, China seldom do empty brags or hot air, unlike india which is full of empty talks and hot air, so just be quiet, and besides that bomber is not for your weak country, it is for the US, so go bark elsewhere.

http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-1903862-1-1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

52051 said:


> In terms of achieve something, China seldom do empty brags or hot air, unlike india which is full of empty talks and hot air, so just be quiet, and besides that bomber is not for your weak country, it is for the US, so go bark elsewhere.
> 
> http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-1903862-1-1.html



The picture you've posted is of a model, not an actual prototype or even a developmental testbed. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.


----------



## Ultima Thule

LKJ86 said:


> Interesting CG
> View attachment 475830
> View attachment 475831
> View attachment 475832
> View attachment 475833
> View attachment 475834
> View attachment 475835


this is ridiculous CG  H-20 is clearly stated that it will be flying wing/tailless design, this design is mixture of swept/ blanded wing design like these
*Boeing 797 hoax* 





*X-48




PAK-DA




these are/will be all blended wing design rather than a flying wing designs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_wing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_wing_body*​


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> And the irony here is you were the first one to post that picture and conclude it was Shenyang’s theatre bomber ... now you’re dissing it as merely a model



No, I was challenging the claim that the bomber is about to make a maiden flight. Unfortunately a picture of the model doesn't tell us anything.


----------



## Figaro

52051 said:


> There are rumors from multiple sources around in China's military themed BBS for a while: It seems that SAC/601 have been developing a stealth fighter-bomber that aiming at replacing J/H-7 and Su-30 fleet, and the fighter-bomber is about to take maiden flight.
> 
> The fighter-bomber will have similiar capability/role like F-111 or Su-34, so no Tu-26-like bomber.
> 
> It seems that this is SAC/601's first priority project that much more likely to recieve orders from PLAAF/PLAN, instead of their FC-31 which still find no customers.


And which are these "multiple sources"?


----------



## kshaib

THEY MIGHT SELL TO PAKISTAN.

PAKISTAN NEEED CHINA. CHINA NEED PAKISTAN.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

kshaib said:


> THEY MIGHT SELL TO PAKISTAN.
> 
> PAKISTAN NEEED CHINA. CHINA NEED PAKISTAN.



Oh come on, that's only a stupid fan-boy's wet dream. 

Even if the Sino-Pakistani-friendship is a very special issue, China will never sell an offensive strategic weapon like a stealth bomber, Pakistan needs none and why some always think Pakistan will get everything for free is also beyond my understanding; nothing in life is for free.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ultima Thule

kshaib said:


> THEY MIGHT SELL TO PAKISTAN.
> 
> PAKISTAN NEEED CHINA. CHINA NEED PAKISTAN.


 NO WISHFUL THINKING OF YOURS @kshaib


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Deino said:


> Even if the Sino-Pakistani-friendship is a very special issue, China will never sell an offensive strategic weapon like a stealth bomber, Pakistan needs none and why some always think Pakistan will get everything for free is also beyond my understanding; nothing in life is for free.


I agree with you on the stealth bomber, but why wouldn't Pakistan expect military assistance from China, especially as China grows richer? It's like the US-Israel relationship - Israel gets plenty of freebies and military assistance from America because Israel is useful to America. Same principle applies here; more so, I think, since Pakistan is far more useful to China, relatively speaking.

In fact, I recall reading once that a Chinese official, when pressed by an American interlocutor, stated that "Pakistan is [China's] Israel."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I agree with you on the stealth bomber, but why wouldn't Pakistan expect military assistance from China, especially as China grows richer? It's like the US-Israel relationship - Israel gets plenty of freebies and military assistance from America because Israel is useful to America. Same principle applies here; more so, I think, since Pakistan is far more useful to China, relatively speaking.
> 
> In fact, I recall reading once that a Chinese official, when pressed by an American interlocutor, stated that "Pakistan is [China's] Israel."




I agree with your comparison, however - similar to Israel - why should Pakistan be more important for China than vice versa and why should the argument "especially as China grows richer" be one for giving anything for free?

Anyway ... that drivels into a too much political off-topic discussion.

Any news on the H-20 itself??

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## royalharris

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I agree with you on the stealth bomber, but why wouldn't Pakistan expect military assistance from China, especially as China grows richer? It's like the US-Israel relationship - Israel gets plenty of freebies and military assistance from America because Israel is useful to America. Same principle applies here; more so, I think, since Pakistan is far more useful to China, relatively speaking.
> 
> In fact, I recall reading once that a Chinese official, when pressed by an American interlocutor, stated that "Pakistan is [China's] Israel."


China don't need "Israel"


----------



## Deino

royalharris said:


> China don't need "Israel"




That comparison was Israel needs the USA like Pakistan needs China, not really the other way around.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I agree with you on the stealth bomber, but why wouldn't Pakistan expect military assistance from China, especially as China grows richer? It's like the US-Israel relationship - Israel gets plenty of freebies and military assistance from America because Israel is useful to America. Same principle applies here; more so, I think, since Pakistan is far more useful to China, relatively speaking.
> 
> In fact, I recall reading once that a Chinese official, when pressed by an American interlocutor, stated that "Pakistan is [China's] Israel."


@ZeEa5KPul China might sell Stealth medium multi role jet like J-31 or some thing from scratch, but not H-20 , Its will become China's main strategic and is Israel has B-2 or some think like that @ZeEa5KPul


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 488823
> View attachment 488824




PLEASE in English as a summary?!!!


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> The news is deleted now.
> 
> Maybe H-20 is being assembled.



But what did it say?


----------



## 星海军事

Deino said:


> But what did it say?



No need to delve into it further.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> No need to delve into it further.



So the rumor is false and/or unrelated to the H-X program?


----------



## cirr

H-20。。。。。。

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

cirr said:


> H-20。。。。。。


Is this some kind of a cryptic clue?


----------



## cirr

Figaro said:


> Is this some kind of a cryptic clue?



Serpentine stealth nozzle manufactured and handed over to FAI.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## cirr

Figaro said:


> What is FAI?



The First Aircraft Institute(一飞院) of AVIC

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

via SDF:



SinoSoldier said:


> *Gongke101*: H-20 will use a modified WS-10.
> 
> Original quote:
> 
> Link: https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=redirect&goto=findpost&ptid=2489918&pid=76892222

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr

It is now a matter of months, not years......

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Feng Leng

cirr said:


> It is now a matter of months, not years......


Please elaborate. The news said the S-duct was just shipped to XAC. So they need to go through static tests before first flight. Then flight tests for at least a year before delivery to the military.


----------



## cirr

Feng Leng said:


> Please elaborate. The news said the S-duct was just shipped to XAC. So they need to go through static tests before first flight. Then flight tests for at least a year before delivery to the military.



The“news” you referred to didn't say when the S-shaped duct was delivered.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Feng Leng

cirr said:


> The“news” you referred to didn't say when the S-shaped duct was delivered.


It was described as some kind of "news" without a specific date, implying that it happened recently. Of course, I would prefer if it happened long ago. After all, the official photo with the sillouette covered in fabric suggests the project is much further along than pre-static testing.


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> It is now a matter of months, not years......



Don't be ridiculous; after the delivery of the S-ducts the other parts would have to be manufactured before prototype assembly could even start. Prototype assembly would take at least a year or two, and then a few additional months for tests, before a rollout and first flight can occur.

Even HAL takes longer when assembling and testing new aircraft. First flight would probably take place in the mid-2020s.


----------



## LKJ86

Akasa said:


> Even *HAL* takes longer when assembling and testing new aircraft. First flight would probably take place in the mid-2020s.


HAL...
Hi, Indian friend!

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Jlaw

Akasa said:


> Even HAL takes longer when assembling and testing new aircraft.


HAL takes four months to change tires, nuff said

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> Mid 2020s sounds ridiculous for a maiden flight ... more likely this publication is older and the H-20 will fly year next year or in 2020. And why bring in HAL? Why ? You're only going to start a flame war ...



Construction of a prototype usually takes 1+ year(s) for an aircraft like the B-2, even with Indian-aided espionage. I brought up HAL to demonstrate that even professional & time-tested companies require years to develop and roll out combat aircraft from the subcomponent manufacturing stage.


----------



## Figaro

Akasa said:


> Construction of a prototype usually takes 1+ year(s) for an aircraft like the B-2, even with Indian-aided espionage. I brought up HAL to demonstrate that even professional & time-tested companies require years to develop and roll out combat aircraft from the subcomponent manufacturing stage.


What I'm saying is that we do not know the exact timing of the article ... it could have been a long time ago and was only just now reported. And I believe you have just contradicted yourself ... you say that it takes one year to build a B-2 prototype and you're telling me that the H-XX's first flight will take place in the mid 2020s??? Oh come on! The H-XX is going to come out sooner than later ...


Akasa said:


> I brought up HAL to demonstrate that even professional & time-tested companies require years to develop and roll out combat aircraft from the subcomponent manufacturing stage.


Could you please stop needlessly interjecting HAL or an Indian weapon into such discussions. This makes it much harder for posters here to take you seriously ... which honestly is a pity since you do at times offer quite reliable/interesting information.



Akasa said:


> Don't be ridiculous; after the delivery of the S-ducts the other parts would have to be manufactured before prototype assembly could even start. Prototype assembly would take at least a year or two, and then a few additional months for tests, before a rollout and first flight can occur.
> 
> Even HAL takes longer when assembling and testing new aircraft. First flight would probably take place in the mid-2020s.


Why do you automatically just assume that none of the parts are manufactured??? Taking on the delivery of a S-duct does not mean that other parts have not been manufactured ... in all likelihood, the H-XX is ready for assembly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## type93

Akasa said:


> I brought up HAL to demonstrate that even professional & time-tested companies require years to develop and roll out combat aircraft from the subcomponent manufacturing stage.


 quoted for hilarity as I fail to recognize HAL as time tested or professional

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

type93 said:


> quoted for hilarity as I fail to recognize HAL as time tested or professional

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 489612


??? @LKJ86 (translation)


----------



## jaybird

Akasa said:


> Construction of a prototype usually takes 1+ year(s) for an aircraft like the B-2, even with Indian-aided espionage. I brought up HAL to demonstrate that even professional & time-tested companies require years to develop and roll out combat aircraft from the subcomponent manufacturing stage.




I'm also optimistic we will see H-20 sooner than later as well. There is a short article screen grab from the same link posted by Deino on second page of the thread mention about certain project's sub component being manufactured since the year 2014. Although it didn't identify specifically what project it was. But it seems to be hinting it's for the H-20.

And the supposedly serpentine nozzle manufactured is huge and complicated! That doesn't sound like it's for fighter jets but more than likely for long range strategic bomber. It took 1 month working from early morning to 12AM everyday to finish the work.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## cirr

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 489746



Six engines

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## cirr

(Reportedly) staring at H-20 "ironbird" test stand





Photo on 18.09.2018

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

cirr said:


> (Reportedly) staring at H-20 "ironbird" test stand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo on 18.09.2018


唐长红, the chief designer of JH-7A and Y-20, is there.
Maybe, he is also the chief designer of H-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> 唐长红, the chief designer of JH-7A and Y-20, is there.
> Maybe, he is also the chief designer of H-20.



Dafengcao connects it to the KJ-600 AEW and not the H-XX:



> A retired PLA General visited an aircraft's iron bird testbed at AVIC 1st aircraft design institute, the aircraft, which is supposed to be the carrier-borne AEW a/c H600.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1043048865505497088


----------



## cirr

A piece of H20?

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Place Of Space

Where is this fking steal bomber, at least a prototype?


----------



## Deino

Place Of Space said:


> Where is this fking steal bomber, at least a prototype?




I think highly likely at Xi'an ... but I'm sure we won't see it soon.


----------



## cirr

Pure speculation? Wide of the mark? Off the mark? Not far from/close to the truth?

*超越B-2——从一张图看待中国隐身轰炸机的设想*

3小时前

这几天网上出现一张图






大家最关心的不是“最大激光增材制造”这样的字眼，而是他代表的是什么飞行器。很显然，埋入机体的发动机风道通路是明显的隐身战机设计特征。而梯形框架代表隐形机体的一个侧边，左右对称的话必然是四个发动机风道通路。再根据旁边那个人身高判断，风道通路直径大于等于1.5米，安装的至少是太行这种大型涡扇发动机，甚至可能是涡扇18。

什么样的隐身战机需要四发埋入机体的大推力涡扇发动机？必然是中国新一代隐身轰炸机，我们权且称之为轰-20。

看发动机风道通路的位置，新一代国产隐身轰炸机很显然是背负式进气道，采用翼身融合体设计的飞翼或者准飞翼构型。有人把它类比做中国的B-2，但很显然，B-2的背负式进气道是凸起在机翼上部，而这张图显示中国的H-20发动机进气道是埋入机翼中的，外形跟B-2有明显区别。

这个部件可以推测为右侧机翼翼根部分，目测右侧高度接近四米，左侧框边超过两米五。作为飞翼布局，驾驶舱和设备舱都布置在机身前部才需要这样的翼根厚度，飞翼尾部趋向扁平化且发动机位置向中间聚拢，可以判断这个部件属于机身前部。部件左侧向外延展成机翼，右侧连接中央升力体机体。四米厚的翼根怕是蓝星首创，中央升力体机体的直径恐怕要超过6米！有兴趣的人可以查查B-2的机身厚度，会有惊喜。

部件的横向跨度大约为5米，按照这个斜率向左侧延伸，机翼延展会达到25米甚至更长。当然机翼斜率各部分会有较大变化，总体判断，H-20翼展会超过56米。

部件上的加强筋纵向分布上密下疏，显示承力结构倾向于机背，符合下部设计为弹舱的要求，如此一来，中央升力体机身下部弹舱的深度至少有2米5，甚至可能达到3米！这个弹舱设计的载弹量，B-2望尘莫及。

为了装载大型远程攻击弹药，我估计新型隐身轰炸机的机身长度会超过B-2 50%以上，这样还能大大改善纵向稳定性和俯仰操纵品质。

综上所述，我们可以看出一些端倪，中国隐形轰炸机在规模上远超B-2，可能起飞重量超过50%以上，最大载弹量能超过B-2一倍有余！如此一来，新轰炸机可能会继续采用H-6K上使用的WS-18发动机，单台推力超过12吨，正好比B-2的发动机推力大50%。WS-18性能成熟可靠，比太行无加力版推力更大，而太行过去从未用于轰炸机，使用经验基本为0。

这样的规格可以看出H-20的设计使用思路跟B-2明显不同。B-2设计于三十多年前，用于在F-22掩护下穿透前苏联的防空体系进行核打击，主要依靠的并不是远程攻击弹药。那个时候远程精确打击费用极其昂贵，B-2能够携带的主要还是核炸弹和普通凌空攻击炸弹，机体设计大幅度向隐身设计倾斜，弹舱设计很难容纳高速远程攻击导弹，只能携带亚音速远程巡航导弹。

H-20虽然可以看做是战略轰炸机，但是它的设计用途比美苏重型轰炸机要广阔得多。事实证明，美国轰炸机真正的用途还是战术轰炸，在没法发动全面性毁灭战争的前提下，B-2出动的效费比极低。H-20的设计思想无疑比四十年前的B-2先进得多，在远程精确攻击弹药白菜化、高速化、智能化的今天，如何发挥常规武器弹药的最大作用才是H-20设计的核心，如果需要发动核打击，核弹头小型化的今天在远程高速攻击导弹上换用核弹头不是难事。而且，H-20远不是只能发动对地面目标的攻击，H-20完全可以作为空中作战体系的信息节点和武库机来使用，H-20可以携带大量远程空空导弹深入纵深打击对手的空中重要节点，也可以携带无人战机进入战区投放大幅度强化战区信息控制，至于携带空射型反舰弹道导弹打击上千公里外敌方舰队更是比现有武器平台效能高几十倍！所以内部对H-20的称呼并非“远程战略轰炸机”，而是“远程战略战术空中攻击平台”。

目前H-20已经进入铁鸟台测试阶段，取得突破性进展，明年进入原型机制造，大概率2020年底前首飞。进入20年代，H-20有望成为全球最先进的战略战术轰炸机。

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Feng Leng

cirr said:


> Pure speculation? Wide of the mark? Off the mark? Not far from/close to the truth?
> 
> *超越B-2——从一张图看待中国隐身轰炸机的设想*
> 
> 3小时前
> 
> 这几天网上出现一张图
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 大家最关心的不是“最大激光增材制造”这样的字眼，而是他代表的是什么飞行器。很显然，埋入机体的发动机风道通路是明显的隐身战机设计特征。而梯形框架代表隐形机体的一个侧边，左右对称的话必然是四个发动机风道通路。再根据旁边那个人身高判断，风道通路直径大于等于1.5米，安装的至少是太行这种大型涡扇发动机，甚至可能是涡扇18。
> 
> 什么样的隐身战机需要四发埋入机体的大推力涡扇发动机？必然是中国新一代隐身轰炸机，我们权且称之为轰-20。
> 
> 看发动机风道通路的位置，新一代国产隐身轰炸机很显然是背负式进气道，采用翼身融合体设计的飞翼或者准飞翼构型。有人把它类比做中国的B-2，但很显然，B-2的背负式进气道是凸起在机翼上部，而这张图显示中国的H-20发动机进气道是埋入机翼中的，外形跟B-2有明显区别。
> 
> 这个部件可以推测为右侧机翼翼根部分，目测右侧高度接近四米，左侧框边超过两米五。作为飞翼布局，驾驶舱和设备舱都布置在机身前部才需要这样的翼根厚度，飞翼尾部趋向扁平化且发动机位置向中间聚拢，可以判断这个部件属于机身前部。部件左侧向外延展成机翼，右侧连接中央升力体机体。四米厚的翼根怕是蓝星首创，中央升力体机体的直径恐怕要超过6米！有兴趣的人可以查查B-2的机身厚度，会有惊喜。
> 
> 部件的横向跨度大约为5米，按照这个斜率向左侧延伸，机翼延展会达到25米甚至更长。当然机翼斜率各部分会有较大变化，总体判断，H-20翼展会超过56米。
> 
> 部件上的加强筋纵向分布上密下疏，显示承力结构倾向于机背，符合下部设计为弹舱的要求，如此一来，中央升力体机身下部弹舱的深度至少有2米5，甚至可能达到3米！这个弹舱设计的载弹量，B-2望尘莫及。
> 
> 为了装载大型远程攻击弹药，我估计新型隐身轰炸机的机身长度会超过B-2 50%以上，这样还能大大改善纵向稳定性和俯仰操纵品质。
> 
> 综上所述，我们可以看出一些端倪，中国隐形轰炸机在规模上远超B-2，可能起飞重量超过50%以上，最大载弹量能超过B-2一倍有余！如此一来，新轰炸机可能会继续采用H-6K上使用的WS-18发动机，单台推力超过12吨，正好比B-2的发动机推力大50%。WS-18性能成熟可靠，比太行无加力版推力更大，而太行过去从未用于轰炸机，使用经验基本为0。
> 
> 这样的规格可以看出H-20的设计使用思路跟B-2明显不同。B-2设计于三十多年前，用于在F-22掩护下穿透前苏联的防空体系进行核打击，主要依靠的并不是远程攻击弹药。那个时候远程精确打击费用极其昂贵，B-2能够携带的主要还是核炸弹和普通凌空攻击炸弹，机体设计大幅度向隐身设计倾斜，弹舱设计很难容纳高速远程攻击导弹，只能携带亚音速远程巡航导弹。
> 
> H-20虽然可以看做是战略轰炸机，但是它的设计用途比美苏重型轰炸机要广阔得多。事实证明，美国轰炸机真正的用途还是战术轰炸，在没法发动全面性毁灭战争的前提下，B-2出动的效费比极低。H-20的设计思想无疑比四十年前的B-2先进得多，在远程精确攻击弹药白菜化、高速化、智能化的今天，如何发挥常规武器弹药的最大作用才是H-20设计的核心，如果需要发动核打击，核弹头小型化的今天在远程高速攻击导弹上换用核弹头不是难事。而且，H-20远不是只能发动对地面目标的攻击，H-20完全可以作为空中作战体系的信息节点和武库机来使用，H-20可以携带大量远程空空导弹深入纵深打击对手的空中重要节点，也可以携带无人战机进入战区投放大幅度强化战区信息控制，至于携带空射型反舰弹道导弹打击上千公里外敌方舰队更是比现有武器平台效能高几十倍！所以内部对H-20的称呼并非“远程战略轰炸机”，而是“远程战略战术空中攻击平台”。
> 
> 目前H-20已经进入铁鸟台测试阶段，取得突破性进展，明年进入原型机制造，大概率2020年底前首飞。进入20年代，H-20有望成为全球最先进的战略战术轰炸机。


So H-20 will be a UCAV mothership too...


----------



## krash

Akasa said:


> Even HAL takes longer when assembling and testing new aircraft.



Lol. HAL? HAL takes forever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 055_destroyer

Feng Leng said:


> So H-20 will be a UCAV mothership too...


That means it will be an air carrier?


----------



## cirr

cirr said:


> A piece of H20?
> 
> View attachment 500431



It is now almost a certainty that the H-20 will use 4 WS-18s as its power plants.

"促进*西飞*、*成发*团队的凝聚力和战斗力，助推双方科研生产目标的实现。希望大家能够在有限的时间内，再加一把力，*共同完成党和国家交付的任务*，将结对共建活动打造成为军工企业协同共进的重要品牌"

http://ep.cannews.com.cn/publish/zghkb7/html/1417/node_052275.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> It is now almost a certainty that the H-20 will use 4 WS-18s as its power plants.
> 
> "促进*西飞*、*成发*团队的凝聚力和战斗力，助推双方科研生产目标的实现。希望大家能够在有限的时间内，再加一把力，*共同完成党和国家交付的任务*，将结对共建活动打造成为军工企业协同共进的重要品牌"
> 
> http://ep.cannews.com.cn/publish/zghkb7/html/1417/node_052275.html



The article stated nothing of the H-20's powerplants or the configuration of the aircraft.


----------



## UserUnknown2025

Akasa said:


> The article stated nothing of the H-20's powerplants or the configuration of the aircraft.


You need to read in between the lines.


----------



## LKJ86

唐长红


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> 唐长红
> View attachment 502543



But is this necessarily related to the H-20??

I know, Tang Changhong was the the general designer of the JH-7 and Y-20 and is most likely the one for the H-20 too ... or am I wrong?



cirr said:


> It is now almost a certainty that the H-20 will use 4 WS-18s as its power plants.
> 
> "促进*西飞*、*成发*团队的凝聚力和战斗力，助推双方科研生产目标的实现。希望大家能够在有限的时间内，再加一把力，*共同完成党和国家交付的任务*，将结对共建活动打造成为军工企业协同共进的重要品牌"
> 
> http://ep.cannews.com.cn/publish/zghkb7/html/1417/node_052275.html



But why WS-18?? Such a dated engine even with more modern technologies incorporated is IMO not the best one for a modern long-range bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> But is this necessarily related to the H-20??
> 
> I know, Tang Changhong was the the general designer of the JH-7 and Y-20 and is most likely the one for the H-20 too ... or am I wrong


He has left the project of Y-20, for something more important.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

cirr said:


> It is now almost a certainty that the H-20 will use 4 WS-18s as its power plants.
> 
> "促进*西飞*、*成发*团队的凝聚力和战斗力，助推双方科研生产目标的实现。希望大家能够在有限的时间内，再加一把力，*共同完成党和国家交付的任务*，将结对共建活动打造成为军工企业协同共进的重要品牌"
> 
> http://ep.cannews.com.cn/publish/zghkb7/html/1417/node_052275.html


Non afterburner WS-10 variant ... not WS-18

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

H-20!!!

Official media confirms that H-20 has made a significant progress!



Video: https://m.weibo.cn/5530708523/4292970754930523

@Beast @wanglaokan @Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 503932
> View attachment 503933
> 
> H-20!!!
> 
> Official media confirms that H-20 has made a significant progress!
> 
> 
> 
> Video: https://m.weibo.cn/5530708523/4292970754930523
> 
> @Beast @wanglaokan @Deino



Interesting, however what kind of "significant progress" this is is not mentioned?


----------



## Akasa

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 503932
> View attachment 503933
> 
> H-20!!!
> 
> Official media confirms that H-20 has made a significant progress!
> 
> 
> 
> Video: https://m.weibo.cn/5530708523/4292970754930523
> 
> @Beast @wanglaokan @Deino



CCTV is a party-run propaganda outlet that spews more fake news than CNN or MSNBC. Unless you have more *authoritative sources* or "big shrimp" talk, this doesn't mean anything.


----------



## eldamar

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 503932
> View attachment 503933
> 
> H-20!!!
> 
> Official media confirms that H-20 has made a significant progress!
> 
> 
> 
> Video: https://m.weibo.cn/5530708523/4292970754930523
> 
> @Beast @wanglaokan @Deino


 doesnt mention any kind of verifiable progress the h20 has.

As much as excited as i am about the h20 myself:

Pls dont post for the sake of posting- especially when most members in this subsection can read chinese for ourselves.


----------



## samsara

Dafeng Cao just tweeted following info:

“In a documentary commemorating the 90th Anniversary of the PLA founding, the subtitle says the new type long range strategic bomber H-20's R&D has made significant progress.“











__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1049303604752932869
Year long I don't find him loving to spread ungrounded rumour 



Akasa said:


> CCTV is a party-run propaganda outlet that spews more fake news than CNN or MSNBC. Unless you have more *authoritative sources* or "big shrimp" talk, this doesn't mean anything.


YES SinoSoldier aka. Akasa, for YOU EVERY piece of news/info from CCTV is a party-run propaganda work. It fits very well your deeply seated perception on the government in Beijing!

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Figaro

Akasa said:


> CCTV is a party-run propaganda outlet that spews more fake news than CNN or MSNBC. Unless you have more *authoritative sources* or "big shrimp" talk, this doesn't mean anything.


Where is your proof that CCTV-9 is not authoritative or spreads fake news more than CNN and MSNBC? The fact that this H-20 development came up in a documentary flick is very credible for most posters here, myself included.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## aliaselin

WS18/D30 at 1st stage, WS30 2nd stage. Both used as sttealthy bomber and flying tanker

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

aliaselin said:


> WS18/D30 at 1st stage, WS30 2nd stage. Both used as sttealthy bomber and flying tanker


What is the WS-30? I thought it was just non-afterburner WS-10 (with higher dry thrust) ... why all these complex engine names?


----------



## JSCh

*Trial flight soon for new type of Chinese stealth bomber*
By Shan Jie Source:Global Times Published: 2018/10/9 23:08:41

The trial flight of China's new-generation stealth bomber Hong-20 may take place soon, military experts said on Tuesday after China's official television station confirmed the name of the bomber.

Disclosing the new bomber is a potential deterrence, Song Zhongping, a military expert and TV commentator, told the Global Times on Tuesday. 

"Usually the development of equipment and weaponry of the People's Liberation Army is highly confidential,"he said.

Revealing the bomber name before trials shows the Chinese aviation industry is gaining more confidence, said Shanghai-based news site thepaper.cn.

China Central Television confirmed in a documentary in August that "the development of new long-distance strategic bomber, Hong-20, has made great progress."

It was the first time "Hong-20" appeared officially. "Hong" is the first character of hongzhaji, "bomber aircraft" in Chinese.

Song said the public unveiling of the bomber suggested that it might have finished testing the hydraulic pressure, electricity supply and avionics systems. 

"The trial flight will come soon," he said.

China's Hong-20 bomber has been under development at the Shanghai Aircraft Design and Research Institute since 2008, Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta previously reported.

"The new generation of bombers can carry more bombs than previous H-6K bombers, have the advantage of stealth features and are able to strike targets from standoff ranges," Song said in a previous interview in April.

The Hong-20 could improve both defensive and offensive air force capabilities and "enable the army to possess stronger nuclear and conventional deterrence," Song said.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Deino

JSCh said:


> *Trial flight soon for new type of Chinese stealth bomber*
> By Shan Jie Source:Global Times Published: 2018/10/9 23:08:41
> ...
> 
> China's Hong-20 bomber has been under development at the Shanghai Aircraft Design and Research Institute since 2008, Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta previously reported.
> ....




Pardon, if I'm sceptical if soon is indeed so soon ... since when is Global Times reliable??

Especially this sentence ruins all credibility:

China's Hong-20 bomber has been under development at the *Shanghai Aircraft Design and Research Institute *since 2008, Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta previously reported.

And based on a Russian newspaper.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Pardon, if I'm sceptical if soon is indeed so soon ... since when is Global Times reliable??
> 
> Especially this sentence ruins all credibility:
> 
> China's Hong-20 bomber has been under development at the *Shanghai Aircraft Design and Research Institute *since 2008, Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta previously reported.
> 
> And based on a Russian newspaper.


At least the Russian newspaper did not claim H-20 was copied off another Russian aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> At least the Russian newspaper did not claim H-20 was copied off another Russian aircraft






Yes, but I'm sure when ut will be unveiled surely one of the usual suspects will claim it is based on stolen data from Northrop Grumman.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr

Deino said:


> But is this necessarily related to the H-20??
> 
> I know, Tang Changhong was the the general designer of the JH-7 and Y-20 and is most likely the one for the H-20 too ... or am I wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> But why WS-18?? Such a dated engine even with more modern technologies incorporated is IMO not the best one for a modern long-range bomber.



With full allowance for the use of more advanced engines in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Bigger than B-2? Interesting...

Maybe, China is planning to give USA a surprise soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## JSCh

Deino said:


> Pardon, if I'm sceptical if soon is indeed so soon ... since when is Global Times reliable??
> 
> Especially this sentence ruins all credibility:
> 
> China's Hong-20 bomber has been under development at the *Shanghai Aircraft Design and Research Institute *since 2008, Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta previously reported.
> 
> And based on a Russian newspaper.


No idea how the Russian newspaper got that info, but then it might not be as ludicrous as it would first appear. IIRC, AVIC first aircraft design and research institute is formed by part of both Xian and Shanghai aircraft design and research institute.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 504190
> 
> Bigger than B-2? Interesting...
> 
> Maybe, China is planning to give USA a surprise soon.



How credible is the OP?


----------



## cirr

Range=16000km?


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> Range=16000km?



Is there a link to this rumor?


----------



## Deino

Interesting... however these winglets surprise me 

Or is it not related to the H-20?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Deino said:


> Or is it not related to the H-20?


No way in hell. Why would they censor text and part of the logo/badge/whatever that's supposed to be and leave a silhouette of the actual bomber?

As for the "bomber", there are no air intakes, the cockpit is comically large in proportion to the wings, the winglets are right out in any stealth bomber design, and the landing gear probably can't support the bomber's weight. This is just some moronic graphic designer's idea of a "futuristic" bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

ZeEa5KPul said:


> No way in hell. Why would they censor text and part of the logo/badge/whatever that's supposed to be and leave a silhouette of the actual bomber?
> 
> As for the "bomber", there are no air intakes, the cockpit is comically large in proportion to the wings, the winglets are right out in any stealth bomber design, and the landing gear probably can't support the bomber's weight. This is just some moronic graphic designer's idea of a "futuristic" bomber.




Agreed, but is there any info on what kind of event this was?


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

Hmmm ... how likely is this?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1051762442718588930
based on this link: https://defence-blog.com/news/china...ic-bomber-during-military-parade-in-2019.html



> *Chinese media* has announced on 15 October that the newest long-range strategic bomber will unveil during a parade as part of the 70th anniversary celebrations of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) in 2019.
> 
> According to the news reports, China to unveil its new long-range strategic bomber at the large-scale air force military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the founding of the PLAAF. However, there’s no official statement or confirmed from the Chinese government or military.




Also, what kind of *Chinese media *has announced this? Any random internet media? The unreliable SCMP or again Global Times?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> Hmmm ... how likely is this?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1051762442718588930
> based on this link: https://defence-blog.com/news/china...ic-bomber-during-military-parade-in-2019.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, what kind of *Chinese media *has announced this? Any random internet media? The unreliable SCMP or again Global Times?


Fake News.


----------



## Deino

So as expected ...

I must admit even if there's indeed a lot of "noise" concerning the H-20 recently, IMO none of the reliable reports directly hint an "appearance soon" or even less a "maiden flight"; these only mention a certain break-thru in design & development. ... therefore these hyping reports like the one from Global Times quoting a Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta - IMO barely reliable in top secret Chinese military matters - and even worse mentioning the wrong aircraft designer, should be IMO at best ignored.


----------



## 艹艹艹

Deino said:


> So as expected ...
> 
> I must admit even if there's indeed a lot of "noise" concerning the H-20 recently, IMO none of the reliable reports directly hint an "appearance soon" or even less a "maiden flight"; these only mention a certain break-thru in design & development. ... therefore these hyping reports like the one from Global Times quoting a Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta - IMO barely reliable in top secret Chinese military matters - and even worse mentioning the wrong aircraft designer, should be IMO at best ignored.








We never believed it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mustang06

Found this on Google. Can someone confirm if the images are fakes or not? @LKJ86


----------



## ILC

Mustang06 said:


> Found this on Google. Can someone confirm if the images are fakes or not? @LKJ86
> View attachment 505496


Fake, since ancient times


----------



## Mustang06

ILC said:


> Fake, since ancient times


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Hmmm ... how likely is this?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1051762442718588930
> based on this link: https://defence-blog.com/news/china...ic-bomber-during-military-parade-in-2019.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, what kind of *Chinese media *has announced this? Any random internet media? The unreliable SCMP or again Global Times?


How can China ever unveil a prototype in a military parade? The J-20 was first unveiled in 2011 and has not flown in a formal parade until July 2017. I'd say mid 2020s you will see the first H-20s flying in formation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## cirr



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> View attachment 518855
> 
> 
> View attachment 518856



reminds me very much on the very first sketches of the J-20 ... so come on, just unveil that beast!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

cirr said:


> View attachment 518855
> 
> 
> View attachment 518856


WTF are tails doing on a stealth bomber?!


----------



## Deino

ZeEa5KPul said:


> WTF are tails doing on a stealth bomber?!



Yes, but were there not some reports a few weeks ago?


----------



## Akasa

ZeEa5KPul said:


> WTF are tails doing on a stealth bomber?!



Because China's development of FBW systems isn't as advanced as some people like to believe.


----------



## lcloo

The canted fins acted as shield on engine heat signature on both sides of the aircraft. I doubt the fins return significant radar signature since J20 and F-22 have them. And F-22's canted tail fins are huge relative to the airframe.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Daniel808

lcloo said:


> The canted fins acted as shield on engine heat signature on both sides of the aircraft. I doubt the fins return significant radar signature since J20 and F-22 have them. And F-22's canted tail fins are huge relative to the airframe.



this one for you
@Akasa


----------



## Akasa

Daniel808 said:


> this one for you
> @Akasa



The issue of exhaust heat is taken care of by the S-ducted inlets/exhaust in addition to exhaust nozzle geometry, as on the B-2. The vertical stabilizers are there to compensate for what the FBW system cannot.


----------



## cirr



Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


>



It's a drone concept.


----------



## gambit

lcloo said:


> The canted fins acted as shield on engine heat signature on both sides of the aircraft.


Not likely. Not if the exhausts are already recessed the way the drawings have them.



lcloo said:


> I doubt the fins return significant radar signature since J20 and F-22 have them. And F-22's canted tail fins are huge relative to the airframe.


The J-20 and F-22 are fighters, so at the current state of flight controls technology, fighters needs all three axes stability and maneuverability surfaces.

There are three rules in designing a low radar observable body: 

- Control of quantity of radiators
- Control of array of radiators
- Control of modes of radiation

What is 'significant radar signature' is relative to the overall body. Under Rule 2, the size of each flight controls element is precisely calculated to radiate (reflect) as minimally as possible while taking into consideration the need of aerodynamic exploitation for stability and maneuver, in other words, even one mm is important. Radar asks if the surface area can be reduced by one mm, Aerodynamics says the area needs to increase by two mm. And both sides comes to a compromise.

So you have no basis for your doubts.

As far as the American B-2 goes. The bomber does not need to be as maneuverable as a fighter, so the vertical stabs are eliminated. The flying wing design have inherent difficulty in controlability in the yaw axis, but the B-2's FBW system is proven to handle that issue. So yes, under the three rules, it is possible that the Chinese 'stealth' bomber design do not have as sophisticated a FBW system as the American bomber, unless the Chinese bomber is planned to be maneuverable similar to a fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> reminds me very much on the very first sketches of the J-20 ... so come on, just unveil that beast!


Deino, I am a latecomer of the J-20 thing, may you just repost the few of the very first sketches of the J-20 if you have them handy  danke!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

samsara said:


> Deino, I am a latecomer of the J-20 thing, may you just repost the few of the very first sketches of the J-20 if you have them handy  danke!




Oh well ... that's indeed some sort of archaeological research

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## lcloo

A new release from CG (Cao Geng) Designer's concept diagram of H-XX.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## cirr

"The Next" viewed from a different angle 






@Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> "The Next" viewed from a different angle
> 
> View attachment 559269
> 
> 
> @Deino



Oh well !!! 

Thanks for the reminder ... but what's the source? Again something official from AVIC / XAC or just fan-made?

A quick search only found this:

http://www.hzc.com/xiaoguotu/detail-33891.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

cirr said:


> "The Next" viewed from a different angle
> 
> View attachment 559269
> 
> 
> @Deino


look like some UCAV/UAV sir but not a bomber


----------



## Khanivore

pakistanipower said:


> look like some UCAV/UAV sir but not a bomber


Is it me or it looks like CGI?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Khanivore said:


> Is it me or it looks like CGI?


Its promo video of new weapons of PLAAF if you go back to few pages, but yes it could be CGI, no one knows how H-20 look like @Khanivore

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

Posted on East Pendulum tweeter today.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Deino

lcloo said:


> View attachment 565485
> 
> Posted on East Pendulum tweeter today.




... and my reply!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1140300229578756097

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## samsara

Hey- fake or not, that looks a bit familiar.

_“Xi'an H-20 Stealth Bomber Concept”_






As posted by some netizen in the thread of the East Pendulum's tweet above.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

samsara said:


> Hey- fake or not, that looks a bit familiar.
> 
> _“Xi'an H-20 Stealth Bomber Concept”_
> View attachment 565526
> 
> 
> As posted by some netizen in the thread of the East Pendulum's tweet above.




That's at best the rumoured H-18, but never the H-20

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JSCh

*Chinese warplane manufacturer teases next entry in ‘20 series’*
By Liu Xuanzun in Tianjin Source:Global Times Published: 2019/10/10 20:48:41



A screen shot shows the mysterious aircraft featured in a nine-second video by Aviation Industry Corporation on Tuesday.

Following the unveiling of the latest member of China's '20 series' of warplanes, the Z-20 utility helicopter, China's warplane manufacturer has teased a mysterious new entry, sparking speculation among military enthusiasts about a possible H-20 stealth bomber.

"Maybe in the future not far from now, China's '20 series' aviation equipment will welcome 'The Next,'" reads a statement sent to the Global Times on Thursday from Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), maker of China's warplanes.

The words "The Next" reminded Chinese military enthusiasts of a video AVIC released in May 2018, which featured computer-generated footage showing a mysterious aircraft with the caption of "The Next."

There is speculation the aircraft could be China's in-development stealth bomber, the H-20.

AVIC's statement, which mainly introduced the Z-20's participation in the ongoing 5th China Helicopter Exposition in Tianjin, did not explain the nature of "The Next" aircraft.

In 2013, the Y-20 large transport plane developed by AVIC made its maiden flight; in 2016, the J-20 stealth fighter jet made its first public flight at the 11th Airshow China; in 2019, the Z-20 utility helicopter made its parade debut at the National Day parade, the statement said, noting that each development had an interval of three years.

The rapid growth of the "20 family" and its members' successful development shows AVIC's growing innovation capabilities and breakthroughs in development speed, AVIC said, noting that it also shows China's increasing transparency and confidence in aviation equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

... so let's wait for 2022?!


----------



## vi-va

Deino said:


> ... so let's wait for 2022?!


Allegedly maiden flight later this year

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228326908711931904

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Deino said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1228326908711931904


Who is this "clarity" person? It's the first I'm hearing of him. Is he credible? If not, why are you posting his drawings here? Why cranked kite and not flying wing?


----------



## Deino

A strange update on the H-20 but I'm not sure on how to rate it: 

The original image was posted here https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2617587-1-1.html … and allegedly the same poster mentioned about one year ago - back in March 29, 2019 - that the H-20's maiden flight is about a year away.

Therefore my concern; neither I know this poster as a credible big-shrimp, nor does this sketch look realistically (IMO). Anyway, at least Huitong seems to rate it worth to post:

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/attack-aircraft-ii.html


----------



## Ultima Thule

Deino said:


> A strange update on the H-20 but I'm not sure on how to rate it:
> 
> The original image was posted here https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2617587-1-1.html … and allegedly the same poster mentioned about one year ago - back in March 29, 2019 - that the H-20's maiden flight is about a year away.
> 
> Therefore my concern; neither I know this poster as a credible big-shrimp, nor does this sketch look realistically (IMO). Anyway, at least Huitong seems to rate it worth to post:
> 
> http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/attack-aircraft-ii.html
> Its more like US B-21 raider rather than B-2
> 
> View attachment 619280


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> A strange update on the H-20 but I'm not sure on how to rate it:
> 
> The original image was posted here https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2617587-1-1.html … and allegedly the same poster mentioned about one year ago - back in March 29, 2019 - that the H-20's maiden flight is about a year away.
> 
> Therefore my concern; neither I know this poster as a credible big-shrimp, nor does this sketch look realistically (IMO). Anyway, at least Huitong seems to rate it worth to post:
> 
> http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/attack-aircraft-ii.html
> 
> 
> View attachment 619280


He was just asking for update on the project.


----------



## Deino

Jinri said:


> He was just asking for update on the project.




You mean Huitong? But why then did he post this sketch on his CMA-site?


----------



## Deino

Interesting update on the H-20 and while this sketch should not be overrated - most likely and quite commonly for such a secret project in China it is more a placeholder - the description says that "it's a new control surfaces configuration for all-wing large aircraft that is used on an "next - generation aircraft". 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1244972348786143232

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

> China’s long-range Xian H-20 stealth bomber could make its debut at Zhuhai air show.



via https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2...tealth-bomber-could-make-its-debut-this-year/

Sorry, but this seems to be just as similar stupid as their claim last year prior to the 70th anniversary parade, the PLAAF might unveil the H-20 during the parade!






... let me wage a guess, surely based on a report written again by Minnie Chan based again on her secret contacts!?

Oh well ... I was right again!

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...xian-h-20-stealth-bomber-could-make-its-debut

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Okay, let's wait and see one more time… 
-
-
But if I revise the timeline a bit to 2020/2021 then I guess it's pretty safe to say.


----------



## Deino

samsara said:


> Okay, let's wait and see one more time…
> -
> -
> But if I revise the timeline a bit to 2020/2021 then I guess it's pretty safe to say.




But even then I won't expect it to be shown - at least not live - at Zhuhai. At best an image...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Globenim

Deino said:


> ... let me wage a guess, surely based on a report written again by Minnie Chan based again on her secret contacts!?
> 
> Oh well ... I was right again!
> 
> https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mil...xian-h-20-stealth-bomber-could-make-its-debut
> 
> View attachment 629618


That Trust and Transparency Policy page is the most hilarious farce I have ever read. The author must have been pissing himself while writing that for SCMP. With exception of a single named paper, of course without link to the quotemined wordsnippets wrapped in paraphrasing, they never named a single source as usual.

Also nice jab labeling China, Hong Kong and Taiwan as three different entitites and good to know there are almost two times as much 5-Eyes-Alliance based reporters working for them than Mainland Chinese

Meanwhile American and Hindu drones insist to label it "CCP state propaganda" and Western media call it a local Chinese newspaper.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Indeed a pure plain stupid post by Minnie Chan ... and now it is even supersonic!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> Indeed a pure plain stupid post by Minnie Chan ... and now it is even supersonic!
> 
> View attachment 629787


But if one reads the complete article, at later part it mentioned about *subsonic speed*, so I guess the upper reference is just a mistake. Subsonic Stealth should be the correct type.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

samsara said:


> But if one reads the complete article, at later part it mentioned about *subsonic speed*, so I guess the upper reference is just a mistake. Subsonic Stealth should be the correct type.




But given the SCMP'S and Minnie Chan's track record it seems as if they take facts not very seriously anyway

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> But given the SCMP'S and Minnie Chan's track record it seems as if they take facts not very seriously anyway


I feel so, they may treat the defence substances moreover the details or technical things liberally or loosely, just another kind of everyday news  hehehe

However, if I expand my comment a bit more, and to be fairer, most publication nowadays have low standard of accuracy, for whatsoever reasons!

Just for illustration, take any publication in English language talking about the number of nuclear warheads, most still blindly yet confidently cited the figure supplied by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) that China only has about 300 nuke heads, a number FAS created from 1990s. And unbelievably unchanged to this date with all the newcomer presence (DF-41, DF-31 etc). Just amazing. A long time member here, @Martian (my apology if the user ID is incorrect) dedicated many pages to debunk this fallacy, then Shanlung/SDF had great exposition too delved into this impossibility.

So, what kind of things like this are telling us, the readers?

For me, I just take the relevant part and ignore the rest of substances incl the many trashes. For in reality it's very difficult to find any English language publication giving the good accuracy and not embedding any political bias inside. If I set my strict measure then I eventually may not read 95% of the publication, news, articles etc… nowadays only some authors are willing to write with good standard and trying to be objective! At the end I just try to be realistic and pragmatic, as I just said, “take what's relevant then ignore the rest incl the garbage!”  just my two cents

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
6


----------



## vi-va

Rumor H-20 first flight on today. Take off at 9:50 AM，Landing 11:01 AM
@Deino
No credible source yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## zhxy

Why doesn't China develop bombers similar to the TU-160?


----------



## aziqbal

viva_zhao said:


> Rumor H-20 first flight on today. Take off at 9:50 AM，Landing 11:01 AM
> @Deino
> No credible source yet.



what is source ? Or rumour ?


----------



## vi-va

zhxy said:


> Why doesn't China develop bombers similar to the TU-160?


Stealthy bomber is superior if you can afford it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

viva_zhao said:


> Rumor H-20 first flight on today. Take off at 9:50 AM，Landing 11:01 AM
> @Deino
> No credible source yet.




If the source is Minnie Chan or the SCMP, the please forget it...


----------



## Deino

zhxy said:


> Why doesn't China develop bombers similar to the TU-160?




Since it is an outdated anachronism ... and the only bomber Russia can currently afford.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

viva_zhao said:


> Rumor H-20 first flight on today. Take off at 9:50 AM，Landing 11:01 AM
> @Deino
> No credible source yet.


Where's the link to your source?


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Where's the link to your source?




Probably this one:

https://tieba.baidu.com/p/6667528925


----------



## samsara

The H-20 strategic stealth bomber was mentioned in a recent article (dated 08 May) carried by the Global Times about some military experts urged China to much increase its nuke deterrence power incl the completion of the nuclear triad delivery means soon!

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187775.shtml

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

samsara said:


> The H-20 strategic stealth bomber was mentioned in a recent article (dated 08 May) carried by the Global Times about some military experts urged China to much increase its nuke deterrence power incl the completion of the nuclear triad delivery means soon!
> 
> https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187775.shtml


Are we sure the Global Times is a good publication to receive our information from?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Figaro said:


> Are we sure the Global Times is a good publication to receive our information from?


Do you have the better source?

For me it's good enough. The Global Times does not create something out of the non-existence. For me it's one of the principal traits to earn some information worthiness.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

samsara said:


> Do you have the better source?
> 
> For me it's good enough. The Global Times does not create something out of the non-existence. For me it's one of the principal traits to earn some information worthiness.


No but a lot of stuff in the Global Times is full of nationalist propaganda and just wide inaccuracies ... in other words, its around SCMP level.


----------



## samsara

Figaro said:


> No but a lot of stuff in the Global Times is full of nationalist propaganda and just wide inaccuracies ... in other words, its around SCMP level.


I think here we are talking about the existence of H-20, aren't we?

As about the qualitative label of “nationalist propaganda”, well, it depends on one's perspective. For me, "propaganda" is telling something untrue (incl the use of all kinds of disinfo techniques), painting the negative picture of some entity when the reality is not like that. OTOH telling own positive things ain't a propaganda, it's PUBLICIZING. English language and Chinese language have different meaning on the word of "propaganda", in Chinese language, when they say "propaganda" they often mean "publicizing".

Nationalism is just a natural thing, nothing wrong with that.

Of course Global Times is a state-owned media, not a corporate one.

As about the "wide inaccuracies", I don't have idea what did you mean. And indeed I don't think as such.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bonito Boy

LKJ86 said:


> Interesting CG
> View attachment 475834



The shape resembles like Stingray Fish from this angle


----------



## Ultima Thule

Bonito Boy said:


> The shape resembles like Stingray Fish from this angle


no


----------



## Arsalan

*Chinese H-20 stealth bomber (first flight):*





Most probably a fake video made by some fans but still..... 

@Deino @cirr @samsara @lcloo @gambit @Beast @LKJ86

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Arsalan said:


> *Chinese H-20 stealth bomber (first flight):*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most probably a fake video made by some fans but still.....
> 
> @Deino @cirr @samsara @lcloo @gambit @Beast @LKJ86


Not a bad attempt to be honest


----------



## Deino

IMO almost 100% sure it's FAKE. It looks simply too much like a B-2 and isn't the text they speak even in English?


----------



## Arsalan

Figaro said:


> Not a bad attempt to be honest






Deino said:


> IMO almost 100% sure it's FAKE. It looks simply too much like a B-2 and isn't the text they speak even in English?


Yup looks like a fake honestly. But as said by Figaro, not a bad attempt. 
Plus i am not sure about the language being English but it do not sounds like Chinese either.


----------



## vi-va

Arsalan said:


> Yup looks like a fake honestly. But as said by Figaro, not a bad attempt.
> Plus i am not sure about the language being English but it do not sounds like Chinese either.


@Deino It's Chinese. They are saying, come on, baby. Take a look at it, quick. Awesome, big and black.


----------



## juj06750

if it's real, foreigners would ask again;

foreigner A: what's the engine for H20?
foreigner B: it's probably russian engine
foreigners A and B: 

westerns only wonder if china reveals any new copycat aircraft
if so, and then ask what's the engine on it? is it russian engine? (hopefully not chinese one)
then another foolish engine talk would start over again 

again, you never know our arms by such attitude 
dude, it's our arms; listen to chinese

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

Fake video show B-2 clearly.


----------



## juj06750

serenity said:


> Fake video show B-2 clearly.


but it rather seems westerners are eager to see chinese B2 copycat and want us to reveal it soon (if any)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

juj06750 said:


> but it rather seems westerners are eager to see chinese B2 copycat and want us to reveal it soon (if any)



Trump want to use as way of saying China stole their B-2 and now more dangerous.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

viva_zhao said:


> @Deino It's Chinese. They are saying, come on, baby. Take a look at it, quick. Awesome, big and black.




But then it is a B-2 video with a modified text and a fake remains a fake ... as such it seems to me some Chinese fan boys seem much more eager "to see chinese B2 copycat" and do everything to try to fool others, but that still doesn't make it real.


----------



## Figaro

juj06750 said:


> if it's real, foreigners would ask again;
> 
> foreigner A: what's the engine for H20?
> foreigner B: it's probably russian engine
> foreigners A and B:
> 
> westerns only wonder if china reveals any new copycat aircraft
> if so, and then ask what's the engine on it? is it russian engine? (hopefully not chinese one)
> then another foolish engine talk would start over again
> 
> again, you never know our arms by such attitude
> dude, it's our arms; listen to chinese


And yet here you are posting an obviously fake video of the H-20



juj06750 said:


> but it rather seems westerners are eager to see chinese B2 copycat and want us to reveal it soon (if any)


What are you trying to say exactly?


----------



## vi-va

Deino said:


> But then it is a B-2 video with a modified text and a fake remains a fake ... as such it seems to me some Chinese fan boys seem much more eager "to see chinese B2 copycat" and do everything to try to fool others, but that still doesn't make it real.


I am not 100% sure it's fake or not. I think it more likely to be fake. But I agree that some fan boy may eager to see H-20, I am one of them.

Fake or not fake, I bet H-20 first flight in 2020. China has no intention to leak this kind of info anyway. B-2 was leaked many years after first flight. Regan did NOT know it before president, he promised to continue B-1 bomber during election, and have to cut fund of B-2, which is a big mistake.

H-20 will be first priority, it will be longer than B-2 I think, to fit in hyper sonic weapons.


----------



## Figaro

viva_zhao said:


> I am not 100% sure it's fake or not. I think it more likely to be fake. But I agree that some fan boy may eager to see H-20, I am one of them.
> 
> Fake or not fake, I bet H-20 first flight in 2020. China has no intention to leak this kind of info anyway. B-2 was leaked many years after first flight. Regan did NOT know it before president, he promised to continue B-1 bomber during election, and have to cut fund of B-2, which is a big mistake.
> 
> H-20 will be first priority, it will be longer than B-2 I think, to fit in hyper sonic weapons.


It is probably 100% fake ... we almost always see new Chinese aircraft developments on a ground view before they fly ... recall the J-20. Or we have a leaked cartoon. Either way for the aircraft to make its debut flying would be very shocking and unprecedented.


----------



## juj06750

Figaro said:


> And yet here you are posting an obviously fake video of the H-20
> What are you trying to say exactly?


oh I don't know if the video is real;
I just post it because someone posted
I am talking about western foreigners who keep asking about H20 (and later its engine too)


----------



## porris

Figaro said:


> And yet here you are posting an obviously fake video of the H-20
> 
> 
> What are you trying to say exactly?


i THINK ITS rEAL I ALSO SEEN COMPLETE VIDEO IN CHINESE PHONEX TV


----------



## Figaro

juj06750 said:


> oh I don't know if the video is real;
> I just post it because someone posted
> I am talking about western foreigners who keep asking about H20 (and later its engine too)


The video is definitely not real ... and what does it have to do with "foreigners who keep asking about H20"


porris said:


> i THINK ITS rEAL I ALSO SEEN COMPLETE VIDEO IN CHINESE PHONEX TV


Since when did Chinese Phoenix TV become a reliable outlet for military news?


----------



## Ultima Thule

juj06750 said:


> oh I don't know if the video is real;
> I just post it because someone posted
> I am talking about western foreigners who keep asking about H20 (and later its engine too)


From the random with no strong source this video may be fake if this is clip of real first flight of H-20 all western media are already showing this clip of H-20
and as for your tall talking about y-20 using ws18 is ridiculous because ws18 is still in development phase so all y-20 is using Russian engines


----------



## Figaro

IAU said:


> From the random with no strong source this video may be fake if this is clip of real first flight of H-20 all western media are already showing this clip of H-20
> and as for your tall talking about y-20 using ws18 is ridiculous because ws18 is still in development phase so all y-20 is using Russian engines


It is very possible that current Y-20s are using the WS-18 ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> It is very possible that current Y-20s are using the WS-18 ...


Yet no solid confirmation


----------



## Hamartia Antidote

Deino said:


> But then it is a B-2 video with a modified text and a fake remains a fake ... as such it seems to me some Chinese fan boys seem much more eager "to see chinese B2 copycat" and do everything to try to fool others, but that still doesn't make it real.



Seems suspiciously familiar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IblinI

It's a tiktok video filmed in US, borrow and pasted some audio of an aunty cheering.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

IblinI said:


> It's a tiktok video filmed in US, borrow and pasted some audio of an aunty cheering.




As expected ... and even more embarrassing for those fan-boys above who claimed it to be real.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> As expected ... and even more embarrassing for those fan-boys above who claimed it to be real.


Maybe someone is editing the video and then showing it to con the Chinese into fanboy mode? I know one Indian guy who does it for fun.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## juj06750

Deino said:


> But then it is a B-2 video with a modified text and a fake remains a fake ... as such it seems to me some Chinese fan boys seem much more eager "to see chinese B2 copycat" and do everything to try to fool others, but that still doesn't make it real.






no; another plain wrong sounds by that image hogger; it seems to me some anti-sino foreigner posted the video saying it's chinese B2 copycat hopefully with russian engine installed; those western foreigners really want to see our new copycat (if any) because it's just fun to see; but they really don't want to see our engine on our aircraft; so they're posting such things only and believe so; I personally expect we don't make B2 copycat; I would say whatever we're going to make now is absolutely better than 40-year-old Cold War weapons
again, listen to us when it's ours


----------



## gambit

juj06750 said:


> I personally expect we don't make B2 copycat;


The body with the lowest radar cross section is the sphere, which is why the sphere is used as a radar calibration shape. So if China want to make a low radar observable bomber, odds are very good that it will be very similar to a flying wing design, like the B-2. Unless you want to call the sphere as China's next bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hamartia Antidote

juj06750 said:


> it seems to me some anti-sino foreigner posted the video saying it's chinese B2 copycat hopefully with russian engine installed;



Where does it say that? All I see is the opposite:
"Chinese 5th generation stealth bomber H20 - FAN VIDEO (most probably fake)"

With no comments

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Hamartia Antidote said:


> Where does it say that? All I see is the opposite:
> "Chinese 5th generation stealth bomber H20 - FAN VIDEO (most probably fake)"
> 
> With no comments




He simply seem to be NOT interested in discussion nor in a reasonable exchange of arguments or facts. All I here since months from him are either the same lame accusations of being "some anti-sino foreigner" (ME, who is everywhere called a only pro-China poster! ) or which chest-bumping statements, which are contradicting everything any reliable poster says.

Or he has issues with reading comprehensoions?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

juj06750 said:


> no; another plain wrong sounds by that image hogger; it seems to me some anti-sino foreigner posted the video saying it's chinese B2 copycat hopefully with russian engine installed; those western foreigners really want to see our new copycat (if any) because it's just fun to see; but they really don't want to see our engine on our aircraft; so they're posting such things only and believe so; I personally expect we don't make B2 copycat; I would say whatever we're going to make now is absolutely better than 40-year-old Cold War weapons
> again, listen to us when it's ours


I have no idea what you are talking about ... when did anyone mention "western foreginers" besides you? Please speak with reason.


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> I have no idea what you are talking about ... when did anyone mention "western foreginers" besides you? Please speak with reason.




Just leave him ... It seem as if he only has some pre-arranged text phrases most of all related in accusations against "Western foreigners", which "should listen to the right Chinese peoples and not only Western propaganda" since otherwise "we are never able to fully understand the true Chinese".

That all might be correct, but accusing us of listing only to Western propaganda, while itself only posting propaganda without any facts, seems almost funny to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## serenity

I think H-20 is many years from flying. The video is fake and definitely shows B-2. If H-20 disclosed this way seems totally ridiculous. It will definitely be similar like J-20 photos on ground for public viewing in a city but already all the important flight tests completed somewhere in rural provinces like USA has some missile and aircraft test facilities in desert. Xian Air Corporation and government create some excitement about the big 20 like J-20, Y-20, H-20 so on but H-20 became this mystery project because stealth bomber is for superpower like USA. Even Russia doesn't have stealth bomber so if China has one, it has become a military power that one day can match USA. I think this create some national excitement for Chinese people but all this talk and news really they will not show any true information about H-20 even if it is already in service anyway. The mystery is romantic and makes some military fans feel full of wonder and imagination. Just a tool for this purpose. The real thing, we don't have any idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Philosopher

juj06750 said:


> [
> no; another plain wrong sounds by that image hogger; it seems to me some anti-sino foreigner posted the video saying it's chinese B2 copycat hopefully with russian engine installed; those western foreigners really want to see our new copycat (if any) because it's just fun to see; but they really don't want to see our engine on our aircraft; so they're posting such things only and believe so; I personally expect we don't make B2 copycat; I would say whatever we're going to make now is absolutely better than 40-year-old Cold War weapons
> again, listen to us when it's ours



Aerospace project designs are aided by supercomputers /CAD. In engineering, _Form follows function_ so similarities are bound to appear if you're after the same parameters. Look at the numerous stealth fighters that are in development today in places like Korea, Japan etc. They all look very similar to F-22, correct? But that is not out of a copy cat attempt but rather the similarity of the designs due to their requirement. Furthermore, militaries do not spend sweat worrying about the media and internet calling their systems copy cats. What matters is creating a solution to your military problems. Pragmatism triumphs over propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

I think juj06750 is being rude for strange reasons probably personal angers. But I can understand because China is so heavily attacked and criticized for wrong reasons. This is mentality becoming increasingly like this. The USA and some other countries can make crazy suggestions and accusations. Many things are of course wrong and bad in China and done by China but if truly just 10/100 things is bad and true then they will always say it is 90/100. Becoming more hate against foreigner and people from these countries. Earth will go towards something like second world war again because majority of people cannot be fair and bother to understand something. For example right now it is all about coronavirus. But still I think over here nobody attacks anyone and everyone has show each other respect so juj06750 you are being weird like false flag troll. This forum is for English so everyone can read it. What's wrong with someone asking questions so politely? If you know the answer you don't have to answer or give true answer.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Figaro

zhxy said:


> Why doesn't China develop bombers similar to the TU-160?


Low survivability ... subsonic + stealth is the way to go.


----------



## Figaro

This was posted on AVIC's Weibo account, but was later deleted. Not sure why the coloring scheme has changed from the one two years ago ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## vi-va

Figaro said:


> This was posted on AVIC's Weibo account, but was later deleted. Not sure why the coloring scheme has changed from the one two years ago ...
> View attachment 649183


You knew what it means in Chinese. This picture is for the Student of Gaokao (7/7) - the exam to university. The carp will become Chinese dragon if the final jump succeed.
The picture itself has no military meaning at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Figaro

vi-va said:


> You knew what it means in Chinese. This picture is for the Student of Gaokao (7/7) - the exam to university. The carp will become Chinese dragon if the final jump succeed.
> The picture itself has no military meaning at all.


Honestly this is virtually the same CG that appeared back in May 2018. Hopefully, we get to see the H-20 at the end of this year or sometime next year. This, the J-35 next year, and the WS-15 will be by far the biggest unveilings in the PLAAF for the next few years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

52051 said:


> ...
> 
> Its one hottest topic in China's military fan BBS now
> 
> The other hot topic around China now is the confirmation from some reliable sources that China has two stealth bombers projects running at rapid progress, one supersonic and one subsonic




Really? .... care to explain where this has been confirmed recently?


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Really? .... care to explain where this has been confirmed recently?


Doesn't sound accurate ... the only accurate and continuous rumor is that the H-20 is going to be a flying wing subsonic stealthy bomber. I think people underestimate the development of bombers, especially the time and cost. Developing one strategic bomber is already a huge task, let alone a completely different style strategic bomber. Sounds like a fanboy's wet dream lol ...


----------



## IblinI

Figaro said:


> Doesn't sound accurate ... the only accurate and continuous rumor is that the H-20 is going to be a flying wing subsonic stealthy bomber. I think people underestimate the development of bombers, especially the time and cost. Developing one strategic bomber is already a huge task, let alone a completely different style strategic bomber. Sounds like a fanboy's wet dream lol ...


He is talking about Shengyang is onto a stealth striker.


----------



## Figaro

serenity said:


> I think H-20 is many years from flying. The video is fake and definitely shows B-2. If H-20 disclosed this way seems totally ridiculous. It will definitely be similar like J-20 photos on ground for public viewing in a city but already all the important flight tests completed somewhere in rural provinces like USA has some missile and aircraft test facilities in desert. Xian Air Corporation and government create some excitement about the big 20 like J-20, Y-20, H-20 so on but H-20 became this mystery project because stealth bomber is for superpower like USA. Even Russia doesn't have stealth bomber so if China has one, it has become a military power that one day can match USA. I think this create some national excitement for Chinese people but all this talk and news really they will not show any true information about H-20 even if it is already in service anyway. The mystery is romantic and makes some military fans feel full of wonder and imagination. Just a tool for this purpose. The real thing, we don't have any idea.


Judging from this timeline, gathered by our very own @Deino, we shouldn't have to wait long to see it. Hopefully just another few months. 





https://jamestown.org/program/the-pla-air-forces-silver-bullet-bomber-force/


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Judging from this timeline, gathered by our very own @Deino, we shouldn't have to wait long to see it. Hopefully just another few months.
> View attachment 656577
> 
> https://jamestown.org/program/the-pla-air-forces-silver-bullet-bomber-force/




Oh well ... you seem to have a better memory that me and even if I indeed made that some long time ago I'm no longer sure how valid is estimation was or is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Oh well ... you seem to have a better memory that me and even if I indeed made that some long time ago I'm no longer sure how valid is estimation was or is.


When do you see the first flight now? Things are bound to have changed from 2017


----------



## Figaro

Another look of the H-20's flying wing design from an early 2010s research paper. Credits to 2=GT.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vi-va

Figaro said:


> Another look of the H-20's flying wing design from an early 2010s research paper. Credits to 2=GT.
> View attachment 659461


kind of too short. very hard to control *Yaw* and *Pintch*.


----------



## Figaro

First pictures of the H-20 confirmed


Spoiler: Pictures








From your's truly

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## vi-va

Figaro said:


> First pictures of the H-20 confirmed
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Pictures
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 665950
> 
> From your's truly


Oh, no. India media.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Figaro

vi-va said:


> Oh, no. India media.


You ruined the spoiler!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## jaybird

The topic I'm most interested in currently is the H-20. I was so excited to see a new post in this thread hoping for some new information or "leak" regarding the development of the H-20. Sooooo disappointed.  I hate you Figaro and India media! 😝

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Figaro

jaybird said:


> The topic I'm most interested in currently is the H-20. I was so excited to see a new post in this thread hoping for some new information or "leak" regarding the development of the H-20. Sooooo disappointed.  I hate you Figaro and India media! 😝


For me it is the following  

WS-15 
H-20
J-35

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

What do you think about this?





According to some guys at Weibo, AVIC's First Institute has recently completed a batch of important tests two days ahead of schedule, which at first were allegedly related to RCS but later this was revised to FCS, so that the (bomber) project is ready to enter the next phase.

Later additional information/translation was added and summarised as:

1. this is the test project of some flight control system, which lasted for 6 days
2. it mentioned during trouble shooting phase, the test team worked together with "XAC test flight institution" as well as "general assembly plant"
3. leader of the 618 institute Song Ke Pu visited the site and boarded the aircraft(登机检查）




4, the aircraft is owned by XAC and is not an UAV/UCAV. (This might hint towards the H-20).
5., there is an assembled aircraft already


via; https://weibo.com/1740979351/JnAdvFIPT?type=comment#_rnd1601832462826

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jaybird

The most interesting and exciting part of the information is obviously they boarded the aircraft or inside the aircraft for the trouble shooting work. So, this aircraft must be pretty big and not UCAV.

The leader of the 618 institute Song Ke Pu was also inside the aircraft. Leaders usually only visit when something break through happen. So, it's must be good news and success story. 

It also mention a group of XAC's first year technicians was allowed to be around to learned from the test team. But would XAC allowed first year technicians to be around such a important project like H-20?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## siegecrossbow

If it is related to FcS then we won’t be able to see the bird for years.


----------



## IblinI

siegecrossbow said:


> If it is related to FcS then we won’t be able to see the bird for years.


“ boarded the aircraft ” means it is not on paper anymore.


----------



## siegecrossbow

IblinI said:


> “ boarded the aircraft ” means it is not on paper anymore.



But they are still tweaking the flight controls. You can board an aircraft that's stationary.


----------



## Figaro

siegecrossbow said:


> If it is related to FcS then we won’t be able to see the bird for years.


Why would tweaking the FCS mean that we won't be able see it for years?


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Why would tweaking the FCS mean that we won't be able see it for years?




Since this could be tested in an iron bird ... which however contradicts the last statement of "has boarded the aircraft!" I think all we need is patience ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Since this could be tested in an iron bird ... which however contradicts the last statement of "has boarded the aircraft!" I think all we need is patience ...



An iron bird is still considered an aircraft, though.


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> Since this could be tested in an iron bird ... which however contradicts the last statement of "has boarded the aircraft!" I think all we need is patience ...


it also mentioned the first year workers interact with the team members, I doubt a highest security project would allowed that.


----------



## Deino

IblinI said:


> it also mentioned the first year workers interact with the team members, I doubt a highest security project would allowed that.




Agreed ... but how would you interpret this post?


----------



## Clutch

*China's H-20 Stealth Bomber Has a Strike Range Over 5,000 Miles. Problem?*






Share on FacebookF
November 5, 2020 Topic: Security Region: Asia Blog Brand: The Reboot Tags: ChinaH-20Stealth BombersPLAAFMilitary

A report says the new supersonic stealth bomber could “double” China’s strike range.
by Kris Osborn


While waiting for large numbers of its emerging H-20 bomber to arrive, China has been consistently upgrading its legacy Xian H-6 bomber to a degree that continues to generate U.S. concern.


The H-6, which can be traced as far back as to the Cold War era Tu-16 strategic heavy bomber, is mentioned thirty-three times in the Pentagon’s 2020 China Military Power report, according to a report from Flightglobal.

The report says the H-6 will likely fly into the 2030s, by virtue of an ongoing series of significant upgrades. Newer K, J, and N variants of the aircraft are powered by two more efficient Soloviev D-30 turbofan engines.



“With much larger engine inlets to accommodate the upgraded powerplant, the K, J and N variants dispense with the original glass nose of the Tu-16 and H-6, replacing it with a solid nose housing for a passive electronically scanned array or, potentially, an active electronically scanned array radar. It also has an electro-optical/infrared turret under the fuselage. The tail gunner’s station found on previous iterations makes way for a fully enclosed tail,” the Flightglobal report says.


Yet another variant is believed to be an electronic warfare aircraft.

Adding to U.S. concerns is China’s new H-20 bomber expected to fly alongside and ultimately replace the H-6. However, part of why the H-6 continues to be extended relates to the time it may take to produce and deploy the H-20 in sufficient numbers.

SPONSORED CONTENT



This kind of phased pattern does, to some extent, resemble the U.S. plans with the B-2 and B-21 bombers. The thirty-year old B-2 is expected to fly for many more years until sufficient numbers of the B-21 arrive. Therefore, in a manner not totally unlike China’s H-6 efforts, the B-2 continues to be upgraded with new weapons, sensors and computer technology to propel the aircraft into future years.

However, there may be substantial differences because, while the H-20 still remains mysterious to a large degree, it may not at all come close to rivaling the Air Force’s new B-21.


Quoting “military sources,” a report from _The New Zealand Herald_ said the new and still somewhat mysterious H-20 bomber could make its first public appearance at this year’s Zhuhai Airshow in November—depending upon how things progress with the coronavirus pandemic.

The New Zealand report says the new supersonic stealth bomber could “double” China’s strike range. Interestingly, although much is still not known about the platform, its existence was cited in the Pentagon’s 2018 and 2019 annual “China Military Power Report.” The 2019 report specifies that the new H-20 will likely have a range of “at least 8,500km” and “employ both conventional and nuclear weaponry.”

SPONSORED CONTENT



Alberta Dealers Place Returned Leased Cars Into Special Loan ProgramDiscount Drivers

_Kris Osborn is defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. _


----------



## CrazyZ

Clutch said:


> *China's H-20 Stealth Bomber Has a Strike Range Over 5,000 Miles. Problem?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Share on FacebookF
> November 5, 2020 Topic: Security Region: Asia Blog Brand: The Reboot Tags: ChinaH-20Stealth BombersPLAAFMilitary
> 
> A report says the new supersonic stealth bomber could “double” China’s strike range.
> by Kris Osborn
> 
> 
> While waiting for large numbers of its emerging H-20 bomber to arrive, China has been consistently upgrading its legacy Xian H-6 bomber to a degree that continues to generate U.S. concern.
> 
> 
> The H-6, which can be traced as far back as to the Cold War era Tu-16 strategic heavy bomber, is mentioned thirty-three times in the Pentagon’s 2020 China Military Power report, according to a report from Flightglobal.
> 
> The report says the H-6 will likely fly into the 2030s, by virtue of an ongoing series of significant upgrades. Newer K, J, and N variants of the aircraft are powered by two more efficient Soloviev D-30 turbofan engines.
> 
> 
> 
> “With much larger engine inlets to accommodate the upgraded powerplant, the K, J and N variants dispense with the original glass nose of the Tu-16 and H-6, replacing it with a solid nose housing for a passive electronically scanned array or, potentially, an active electronically scanned array radar. It also has an electro-optical/infrared turret under the fuselage. The tail gunner’s station found on previous iterations makes way for a fully enclosed tail,” the Flightglobal report says.
> 
> 
> Yet another variant is believed to be an electronic warfare aircraft.
> 
> Adding to U.S. concerns is China’s new H-20 bomber expected to fly alongside and ultimately replace the H-6. However, part of why the H-6 continues to be extended relates to the time it may take to produce and deploy the H-20 in sufficient numbers.
> 
> SPONSORED CONTENT
> 
> https://paid.outbrain.com/network/r...UomsiSvtiSl7Tf5Ez8TmdXGDmtxvX2&c=1829421b&v=3
> This kind of phased pattern does, to some extent, resemble the U.S. plans with the B-2 and B-21 bombers. The thirty-year old B-2 is expected to fly for many more years until sufficient numbers of the B-21 arrive. Therefore, in a manner not totally unlike China’s H-6 efforts, the B-2 continues to be upgraded with new weapons, sensors and computer technology to propel the aircraft into future years.
> 
> However, there may be substantial differences because, while the H-20 still remains mysterious to a large degree, it may not at all come close to rivaling the Air Force’s new B-21.
> 
> 
> Quoting “military sources,” a report from _The New Zealand Herald_ said the new and still somewhat mysterious H-20 bomber could make its first public appearance at this year’s Zhuhai Airshow in November—depending upon how things progress with the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> The New Zealand report says the new supersonic stealth bomber could “double” China’s strike range. Interestingly, although much is still not known about the platform, its existence was cited in the Pentagon’s 2018 and 2019 annual “China Military Power Report.” The 2019 report specifies that the new H-20 will likely have a range of “at least 8,500km” and “employ both conventional and nuclear weaponry.”
> 
> SPONSORED CONTENT
> 
> 
> 
> Alberta Dealers Place Returned Leased Cars Into Special Loan ProgramDiscount Drivers
> 
> _Kris Osborn is defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. _


H-20 will not be supersonic. Author is supposedly a military expert,.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Deino

CrazyZ said:


> H-20 will not be supersonic. Author is supposedly a military expert,.




Just read NationalInterest ... and the stopped!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

_Kris Osborn is defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology.

Small wonder USA Military is a faltering force staffed with such highly qualified Experts.

   _

Reactions: Haha Haha:
5


----------



## vi-va

Deino said:


> Since this could be tested in an iron bird ... which however contradicts the last statement of "has boarded the aircraft!" I think all we need is patience ...


National propaganda if not national BS

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

_Yes. China Military are shroud in secrecy by design. 

The unveiling of the H-20 covered by tarpaulin was one example and that was years ago. Same with the unveiling of J-10 or J-20 in blurred images or CG. Then barrages of allegations and testimonies claiming they were either fake or real before the sharper images arrived. 

That's what make the life of a China Watcher so interesting and exciting. Welcome onboard.  _

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> _Yes. China Military are shroud in secrecy by design.
> 
> *The unveiling of the H-20 covered by tarpaulin was one example and that was years ago. *Same with the unveiling of J-10 or J-20 in blurred images or CG. Then barrages of allegations and testimonies claiming they were either fake or real before the sharper images arrived.
> 
> That's what make the life of a China Watcher so interesting and exciting. Welcome onboard. _




When was an image of the H-20 prototype covered by tarpaulin posted years ago??


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> When was an image of the H-20 prototype covered by tarpaulin posted years ago??


It was a fake PS ...


----------



## White and Green with M/S

Figaro said:


> It was a fake PS ...
> View attachment 692199


Na i thinks he might be referring to PLAAF promotional video back in i think late 2018 where in a last part H-20 was shown under the turpolin


Deino said:


> When was an image of the H-20 prototype covered by tarpaulin posted years ago??

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

White and Green with M/S said:


> Na i thinks he might be referring to PLAAF promotional video back in i think late 2018 where in a last part H-20 was shown under the turpolin


Yes. You are absolutely right. 
www.thesun.co.uk/news/worldnews/6291433/china-teases-new-stealth-bomber-with-vid-trolling-us-rivals-super-bowl-advert/amp/
https://www-theweek-in.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.theweek.in/news/world/2020/05/04/china-could-unveil-stealth-bomber-in-november-report.amp.html?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16068067008999&amp_ct=1606806712513&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theweek.in%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F2020%2F05%2F04%2Fchina-could-unveil-stealth-bomber-in-november-report.html


----------



## Deino

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> Yes. You are absolutely right.
> www.thesun.co.uk/news/worldnews/6291433/china-teases-new-stealth-bomber-with-vid-trolling-us-rivals-super-bowl-advert/amp/
> https://www-theweek-in.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.theweek.in/news/world/2020/05/04/china-could-unveil-stealth-bomber-in-november-report.amp.html?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#aoh=16068067008999&amp_ct=1606806712513&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theweek.in%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F2020%2F05%2F04%2Fchina-could-unveil-stealth-bomber-in-november-report.html




Sorry, but we all know this was not the real prototype but simply a CG! How could anyone rate this a real image??


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

Deino said:


> Sorry, but we all know this was not the real prototype but simply a CG! How could anyone rate this a real image??


Is it a CG?


----------



## Deino

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> Is it a CG?




Yes for sure.


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

_Well. Even Huitong is displaying in his blog as an image for H-20._


----------



## Figaro

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> Is it a CG?





Deino said:


> Yes for sure.


It is an accurate CG most likely because it comes directly from AVIC ... we should expect the final H-20 to have a very similar profile.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## samsara

*China’s H-20 stealth bomber will give PLA ‘truly intercontinental’ strike capacity, says report*

Royal United Services Institute says the plane will allow China to extend its strike range far beyond its own shores
Subsonic jet will mark a ‘major break’ with current capacity and could allow it to target US bases further afield
*By Kristin Huang and Liu Zhen in Beijing | South China Morning Post*
Published: 6:00am, 26 Nov, 2020






_Artist’s impression of an H-20 stealth bomber. Photo: Weibo_

*China’s **subsonic H-20 stealth bomber** will give the country a “truly intercontinental” capacity expanding its reach far beyond the country’s seaboard*, according to a report by a leading think tank.

*The bomber is still under development* but the Pentagon believes that when completed it will be able to target US overseas territories such as Guam, while other analysts believe its range will bring Hawaii within reach.

The report by the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) for Defence and Security Studies gave an overview of how Russia and China were developing their air forces, including next-generation planes and new weapons.

_“Armed with nuclear and conventional stand-off missiles, the H-20 would represent a major break from previous PLAAF (PLA Air Force) doctrine and equipment development practice,”_ said the report released in late October.

It added that the PLA air force is currently configured as a regional force which is capable of penetrating the first island chain – a series of archipelagos in the Pacific stretching from the Kuril Islands, through Japan and on to the Philippines.

_“The H-20, by contrast, would give China a truly intercontinental power-projection capability,”_ the report said.

*Plans for the H-20 were announced by the PLA in 2016 and the subsonic bomber may be ready to enter service within five years.*

*Mainland media reports have said it will be able to deliver a **payload of 45 tonnes**, including nuclear weapons, and fire four stealth or hypersonic cruise missiles.*

It is being developed as part of the PLA air force plans to expand its bomber operations, which form part of the broader programme to upgrade the armed forces.

In August the US defence department published a report that estimated its cruising distance. at 8,500km (5,280 miles), which would bring the US overseas territory of Guam well within range.

*But other military experts have estimated the distance is **more than 12,000km**, which would mean Hawaii would be within striking range.*

Song Zhongping, a former instructor with the PLA, said the *H-20 had been designed* to reach US territory as *part of China’s nuclear triad*, which also includes ground and sea-launched missiles.

_“But the __*flywing design*__ means it is unlikely to have aerial combat capability, therefore, stealth is more important,”_ he said.

*Zhang Zhaozhong, from the National Defence University, said that **stealth is the core capability for the H-20*, as in modern warfare _“flying bomb trucks”_ have been replaced by agile multi-purpose fighters, while improved air defence systems mean *high-speed penetration attempts are unlikely to succeed*.

_“*Thus stealth has been chosen* and proven effective by both the American and Russian next-generation strategic bombers,”_ he said in a post on social media.

_“Basically it is confirmed the next generation Chinese strategic bomber will use stealth, probably similar to the US B-21.”

In addition to the long-range H-20_, the RUSI report also said China was *also developing medium-range low observability bombers*, which will improve the PLA’s strike capability in contested air space – in particular its ability to attack key US bases in Guam and Okinawa.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*Kristin Huang*_ is a senior reporter for the China desk, and focuses on diplomacy and defence. She joined the Post in 2016, and previously reported for China Review News Agency. Kristin is interested in security in northeast Asia and China's growing military might._

_*Liu Zhen* joined the Post in 2015 as a reporter on the China desk. She previously worked with Reuters in Beijing._

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## juj06750

samsara said:


> *China’s H-20 stealth bomber will give PLA ‘truly intercontinental’ strike capacity, says report*
> 
> Royal United Services Institute says the plane will allow China to extend its strike range far beyond its own shores
> Subsonic jet will mark a ‘major break’ with current capacity and could allow it to target US bases further afield
> *By Kristin Huang and Liu Zhen in Beijing | South China Morning Post*
> Published: 6:00am, 26 Nov, 2020
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> *Kristin Huang*_ is a senior reporter for the China desk, and focuses on diplomacy and defence. She joined the Post in 2016, and previously reported for China Review News Agency. Kristin is interested in security in northeast Asia and China's growing military might._
> 
> _*Liu Zhen* joined the Post in 2015 as a reporter on the China desk. She previously worked with Reuters in Beijing._







another Minnie Chan (?) from South China Morning Post (the famous anti-chinese media in hong kong)
they are asian female reporters without much knowledge of arms development;
I wish South China Morning Post employs expertise reporters

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

samsara said:


> *Zhang Zhaozhong, from the National Defence University, said that **stealth is the core capability for the H-20*, as in modern warfare _“flying bomb trucks”_ have been replaced by agile multi-purpose fighters, while improved air defence systems mean *high-speed penetration attempts are unlikely to succeed*.


Isn't this the same guy who said the US could not take Baghdad in 1000 years back in 2003? Not sure if his word is too credible here.


----------



## samsara

Figaro said:


> Isn't this the same guy who said the US could not take Baghdad in 1000 years back in 2003? Not sure if his word is too credible here.


It's up to you want to take his words or not. I take his words for this matter. Every one who reads seriously here (and in SDF too) know who's the background Zhang Zhaozhong. Some times he might not tell all the truth intentionally, which is understandable.

But what's your wonder indeed about a SUBSONIC STEALTH H-20?

If you have different opinion on H-20, just say it out. Do you think it will be SUPERSONIC?  Or, non-stealth??

Btw I don't know the Baghdad thing, but it's too long already and not relevant at all here. And for such thing, whatever it was, has nothing to do with the present affairs. I am surprised that you raised such trivial and obsolete thing at ease for questioning the substance, or judging one's standing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

samsara said:


> It's up to you want to take his words or not. I take his words for this matter. Every one who reads seriously here (and in SDF too) know who's the background Zhang Zhaozhong. Some times he might not tell all the truth intentionally, which is understandable.
> 
> But what's your wonder indeed about a SUBSONIC STEALTH H-20?
> 
> If you have different opinion on H-20, just say it out. Do you think it will be SUPERSONIC?  Or, non-stealth??
> 
> Btw I don't know the Baghdad thing, but it's too long already and not relevant at all here. And for such thing, whatever it was, has nothing to do with the present affairs. I am surprised that you raised such trivial and obsolete thing at ease for questioning the substance, or judging one's standing.


No I just mean we are probably not getting any new information out of him. It has been known for many years now that the H-20 will utilize a subsonic flying wing design. Most likely, he does not have extra information on this (as the H-20 is extremely classified).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Last starfighter

*China’s New Stealth Bomber Can't Be as Powerful as It Sounds*
Reports say it can fly halfway across the Pacific carrying 45 tons of bombs. That's ... unlikely.
By Kyle Mizokami 
DEC 9, 2020





China’s first totally new bomber in decades, the H-20, will reportedly give the country “truly intercontinental power-projection capability.”
The H-20 is believed to be similar in appearance to the American B-2 Spirit bomber.
A _South China Morning Post_ report adds other details from the mainland, though some seem unlikely.
report on China’s new, upcoming bomber paints a picture of a big, stealthy plane capable of flying halfway across the Pacific, laden with up to 45 tons of bombs.
The _South China Morning Post _(SCMP) claims the bomber will make China an intercontinental power, but don’t be surprised if the real plane falls short of its capabilities.
The Xi’an H-20, according to the SCMP, is a large, stealthy bomber under development for China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force. The bomber would supplement and eventually replace the H-6, a 1950s-era design that China has steadily upgraded over the decades.
The H-20, which China announced in 2016, is expected to be revealed sometime in the next year or two.

The H-20 is depicted as having a flying wing design that trades speed for range and stealth. According to SCMP’s mainland sources, the H-20 will have a bomb load of 45 tons, far more than the B-52H Stratofortress’s 35 tons and the B-2 Spirit’s 20 tons.
Do the H-20's specifications sound credible?
Yes. China has made great strides, and rumors about upcoming equipment are generally accurate.No. It sounds far too ambitious, large, costly, and beyond the country's capabilities.
Do the H-20's specifications sound credible?
The SCMP article cites unnamed sources who say the bomber will also have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers, or at 7,456 miles—an impressive range that would put Hawaii within reach of the H-20. It would also put all 50 U.S. states within striking distance if the H-20 took an Arctic flight route.
By comparison, the B-52H has an unrefueled combat range of 8,800 miles, while the B-2 has an unrefueled range of 6,904 miles.





B-52H bomber flying over New York City, July 4th, 2020.
The SCMP also cites mainland reports that say the H-20 will be equipped with nuclear weapons, forming one leg of a nuclear triad that also includes nuclear missile submarines and land-based missiles. The bomber will also carry four “stealth or hypersonic” missiles.


The aircraft the SCMP describes seems unlikely to add up to a real bomber. A flying wing design that carries 45 tons of bombs would be enormous: Unlike bombers such as the H-6 and B-52H, which have long fuselages capable of carrying vast amounts of bombs, a flying wing must stuff everything (weapons included) into a flying boomerang shape. The H-20, as sketched out by the SCMP, would need to be much larger than the four-engined B-2.





The B-2 stealth bomber.
JEROD HARRISGETTY IMAGES

There’s also the matter of the 7,456-mile combat range. That number is a _huge_ leap over the H-6, and seems to conveniently cover the entire United States. The H-20 would have to carry an enormous amount of fuel to transport 45 tons of bombs, further adding to the bomber’s size.





Chinese H-6 bombers flying in formation over Beijing, 2019.
BARCROFTGETTY IMAGES

It seems unlikely that the final bomber will be this much of a “wonder weapon.” While China has taken great strides in military technology over the past 30 years, much of it has been incremental in terms of progress. The Pentagon, in its 2020 report on Chinese Military Power, pegs the H-20 as a plane with a more modest 5,281-mile range and the ability to lift just 10 tons of munitions.

One thing the SCMP article _definitely_ gets right, however, is the new bomber's nuclear role. China, which lacks the aerospace know-how to build modern bombers, operates a nuclear “dyad,” consisting of land- and submarine-launched missiles. The H-20 will almost certainly add a third leg to Beijing’s nuclear capability, making it a true “triad.”

According to _The Diplomat_, some of China’s H-6 bombers appear to be adopting a nuclear mission. H-6 bombers lack the range to reach the U.S., and would be easily destroyed by modern air defenses. China is likely developing the weapons, procedures, and tactics for a nuclear bomber now so a new bomber, once operational, could step in and assume the role relatively quickly.

I hope readers like this light reading courtesy of Popular Mechanics


----------



## striver44

their J-20 is only a modest success.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Deino

Last starfighter said:


> *China’s New Stealth Bomber Can't Be as Powerful as It Sounds*
> Reports say it can fly halfway across the Pacific carrying 45 tons of bombs. That's ... unlikely.
> By Kyle Mizokami
> DEC 9, 2020
> View attachment 694677
> 
> ...



 

*Oh come on ... we have a thread already, so please DO NOT start a new one just for a stupid report. *


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

Last starfighter said:


> *China’s New Stealth Bomber Can't Be as Powerful as It Sounds*
> Reports say it can fly halfway across the Pacific carrying 45 tons of bombs. That's ... unlikely.
> By Kyle Mizokami
> DEC 9, 2020
> View attachment 694677
> 
> 
> China’s first totally new bomber in decades, the H-20, will reportedly give the country “truly intercontinental power-projection capability.”
> The H-20 is believed to be similar in appearance to the American B-2 Spirit bomber.
> A _South China Morning Post_ report adds other details from the mainland, though some seem unlikely.
> report on China’s new, upcoming bomber paints a picture of a big, stealthy plane capable of flying halfway across the Pacific, laden with up to 45 tons of bombs.
> The _South China Morning Post _(SCMP) claims the bomber will make China an intercontinental power, but don’t be surprised if the real plane falls short of its capabilities.
> The Xi’an H-20, according to the SCMP, is a large, stealthy bomber under development for China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force. The bomber would supplement and eventually replace the H-6, a 1950s-era design that China has steadily upgraded over the decades.
> The H-20, which China announced in 2016, is expected to be revealed sometime in the next year or two.
> 
> The H-20 is depicted as having a flying wing design that trades speed for range and stealth. According to SCMP’s mainland sources, the H-20 will have a bomb load of 45 tons, far more than the B-52H Stratofortress’s 35 tons and the B-2 Spirit’s 20 tons.
> Do the H-20's specifications sound credible?
> Yes. China has made great strides, and rumors about upcoming equipment are generally accurate.No. It sounds far too ambitious, large, costly, and beyond the country's capabilities.
> Do the H-20's specifications sound credible?
> The SCMP article cites unnamed sources who say the bomber will also have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers, or at 7,456 miles—an impressive range that would put Hawaii within reach of the H-20. It would also put all 50 U.S. states within striking distance if the H-20 took an Arctic flight route.
> By comparison, the B-52H has an unrefueled combat range of 8,800 miles, while the B-2 has an unrefueled range of 6,904 miles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B-52H bomber flying over New York City, July 4th, 2020.
> The SCMP also cites mainland reports that say the H-20 will be equipped with nuclear weapons, forming one leg of a nuclear triad that also includes nuclear missile submarines and land-based missiles. The bomber will also carry four “stealth or hypersonic” missiles.
> 
> 
> The aircraft the SCMP describes seems unlikely to add up to a real bomber. A flying wing design that carries 45 tons of bombs would be enormous: Unlike bombers such as the H-6 and B-52H, which have long fuselages capable of carrying vast amounts of bombs, a flying wing must stuff everything (weapons included) into a flying boomerang shape. The H-20, as sketched out by the SCMP, would need to be much larger than the four-engined B-2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The B-2 stealth bomber.
> JEROD HARRISGETTY IMAGES
> 
> There’s also the matter of the 7,456-mile combat range. That number is a _huge_ leap over the H-6, and seems to conveniently cover the entire United States. The H-20 would have to carry an enormous amount of fuel to transport 45 tons of bombs, further adding to the bomber’s size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese H-6 bombers flying in formation over Beijing, 2019.
> BARCROFTGETTY IMAGES
> 
> It seems unlikely that the final bomber will be this much of a “wonder weapon.” While China has taken great strides in military technology over the past 30 years, much of it has been incremental in terms of progress. The Pentagon, in its 2020 report on Chinese Military Power, pegs the H-20 as a plane with a more modest 5,281-mile range and the ability to lift just 10 tons of munitions.
> 
> One thing the SCMP article _definitely_ gets right, however, is the new bomber's nuclear role. China, which lacks the aerospace know-how to build modern bombers, operates a nuclear “dyad,” consisting of land- and submarine-launched missiles. The H-20 will almost certainly add a third leg to Beijing’s nuclear capability, making it a true “triad.”
> 
> According to _The Diplomat_, some of China’s H-6 bombers appear to be adopting a nuclear mission. H-6 bombers lack the range to reach the U.S., and would be easily destroyed by modern air defenses. China is likely developing the weapons, procedures, and tactics for a nuclear bomber now so a new bomber, once operational, could step in and assume the role relatively quickly.
> 
> I hope readers like this light reading courtesy of Popular Mechanics



_This is just an opinion and pure speculation as no one knew about the real capability of the secretive H-20 yet._
.


striver44 said:


> their J-20 is only a modest success.


_Example of another biased and hopeless opinion. _


----------



## Han Patriot

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> _This is just an opinion and pure speculation as no one knew about the real capability of the secretive H-20 yet._
> .
> 
> _Example of another biased and hopeless opinion. _


Can't be sound like he is guestimat8ng.


----------



## samsara

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> _This is just an opinion and pure speculation as no one knew about the real capability of the secretive H-20 yet._
> .
> 
> _*Example of another biased and hopeless opinion.* _


I think the poster, striver44, just played out with sarcasm without applying the marking /s  to not spoil the fun

The H-20 for its very nature as a strategic asset, moreover as part of the nuke triad, will be much classified more than the many other assets. Relevant info will be revealed publicly in time in future on the need to know basis and via various _indirect_ references. I won't be surprised that during its early years there will be scarce info on this aircraft.

The guesstimate OSINT will be the name of the game in town

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## vi-va

juj06750 said:


> View attachment 694383
> 
> another Minnie Chan (?) from South China Morning Post (the famous anti-chinese media in hong kong)
> they are asian female reporters without much knowledge of arms development;
> I wish South China Morning Post employs expertise reporters


No discrimination, but women are less suitable for military stuff in most cases. They are not military guy in their heart.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Wow ... look what briefly appeared in the latest PLAAF recruitment video






微博视频







video.h5.weibo.cn





Even if it looks like a CG ig is anyway the most recent official 'hint' of the H-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## AMG_12

Deino said:


> Wow ... look what briefly appeared in the latest PLAAF recruitment video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 微博视频
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> video.h5.weibo.cn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if it looks like a CG ig is anyway the most recent official 'hint' of the H-20.
> 
> View attachment 703623
> View attachment 703624
> View attachment 703625


Inspired by B2?


----------



## Stealth

AMG_12 said:


> Inspired by B2?



No, inspired by* Horten Ho 229 on whom Americans designed their B2*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Figaro

Stealth said:


> No, inspired by* Horten Ho 229 on whom Americans designed their B2*


Modern militaries owe so much to German WWII military developments ... kinda makes you wonder how scary of a superpower Nazi Germany would have been had they actually won the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aziqbal

AMG_12 said:


> Inspired by B2?





hopefully its not a Z20 style total rip off and they have done some serious design work themselves


----------



## Figaro

aziqbal said:


> hopefully its not a Z20 style total rip off and they have done some serious design work themselves


Why would it be? The only reason why the Z-20 was a large ripoff was because the PLAGF was so satisfied with the UH-60 in the first place. It wasn't because they couldn't design another medium transport helicopter you know.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Daniel808

aziqbal said:


> hopefully its not a Z20 style total rip off and they have done some serious design work themselves



C'mon dude. They don't make weapons for catwalk in parade. They make weapons for war.

As long as your enemy have good design, why not?
Anyway, Z-20 have some major difference from UH-60, not completely same design.

Just like US following China. Copying Digital Camo on their Tanks








__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1345090566535716864Like I said, if your enemy have good design. Why not get some inspiration from them.






And sometimes, turn out more deadly

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2


----------



## gambit

Stealth said:


> No, inspired by* Horten Ho 229 on whom Americans designed their B2*


Not true. The flying wing design have been known since the 1920s. All major aviation powers back then were experimenting with the flying wing to varying degrees.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## White and Green with M/S

gambit said:


> Not true. The flying wing design have been known since the 1920s. All major aviation powers back then were experimenting with the flying wing to varying degrees.


Yes you're right Northrop company was studying flying WinG design since early to mid 20s


----------



## JSCh

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1346752351416111107

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mike2000 is back

Figaro said:


> kinda makes you wonder how scary of a superpower Nazi Germany would have been had they actually won the war.


Agree. Hitler really messed up Germany. If he had been a bit more level headed, patient and more diplomatic, then Germany will probably have emerged a superpower along with the US. The Soviets would have had it more difficult and probably be in a secondary role I think.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Feng Leng

JSCh said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1346752351416111107


I hope the H-20 will be the first supersonic VLO bomber.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## siegecrossbow

Feng Leng said:


> I hope the H-20 will be the first supersonic VLO bomber.



If it is a flying wing design I highly doubt that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

mike2000 is back said:


> Agree. Hitler really messed up Germany. If he had been a bit more level headed, patient and more diplomatic, then Germany will probably have emerged a superpower along with the US. The Soviets would have had it more difficult and probably be in a secondary role I think.


Had Hitler been more militarily astute (i.e. listening to his generals), even the USSR would have been conquered. So instead of the Cold War being between the US and USSR, it would have been between the US against Nazi Germany, the latter of which would have been much harder to deal with than the USSR.


----------



## bshifter

Figaro said:


> Had Hitler been more militarily astute (i.e. listening to his generals), even the USSR would have been conquered. So instead of the Cold War being between the US and USSR, it would have been between the US against Nazi Germany, the latter of which would have been much harder to deal with than the USSR.


German scientists were employed in US after the defeat of Nazi. Had there been no WW2 USA would not have emerged as powerful as it did back then. Von Braun would have made Germany even a Space Power.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

siegecrossbow said:


> If it is a flying wing design I highly doubt that.


Which all indications point to it being ... stealth and supersonic unfortunately are contradictory.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Figaro said:


> Which all indications point to it being ... stealth and supersonic unfortunately are contradictory.



Not really. Flying wing has more fuel capacity and more range. Supersonic has different shape but less fuel capacity and less range. Case in point. B-1B, Tu-160.


----------



## gambit

Figaro said:


> Which all indications point to it being ... stealth and supersonic unfortunately are contradictory.


No, they are not. There is a shape that is equally efficient at being low radar observable and amenable to supersonic. And that is all I will say for now. You guys are grossly mistaken if you think we cannot make the two works.


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

gambit said:


> No, they are not. There is a shape that is equally efficient at being low radar observable and amenable to supersonic. And that is all I will say for now. You guys are grossly mistaken if you think we cannot make the two works.



Flying saucer. It minimizes RCS and maximizes fuel.


----------



## gambit

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Flying saucer. It minimizes RCS and maximizes fuel.


Nope...But close. The ogive shape make propulsion placement difficult especially still in the jet age.


----------



## Figaro

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Not really. Flying wing has more fuel capacity and more range. Supersonic has different shape but less fuel capacity and less range. Case in point. B-1B, Tu-160.


B1B and Tu-160 are not stealthy ...


----------



## Feng Leng

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Not really. Flying wing has more fuel capacity and more range. Supersonic has different shape but less fuel capacity and less range. Case in point. B-1B, Tu-160.


H-20 is not a simple flying wing. It has distinct fuselage and wings. The most recent official video confirms it. I think PLAAF demanded that H-20 be both VLO and supersonic capable.


----------



## White and Green with M/S

Feng Leng said:


> H-20 is not a flying wing. The most recent official video confirms it. I think PLAAF demanded that H-20 be both VLO and supersonic capable.


No flying wing can't be supersonic because of their design limitations


----------



## Daniel808

Feng Leng said:


> H-20 is not a simple flying wing. It has distinct fuselage and wings. The most recent official video confirms it. I think PLAAF demanded that H-20 be both VLO and supersonic capable.



So Chinese H-20, will be 'more like' B-21 than B-2.

Interesting indeed


----------



## CIA Mole

2x ws10 or 2x ws 15?

don’t these need a lot of thrust?


----------



## Figaro

CIA Mole said:


> 2x ws10 or 2x ws 15?
> 
> don’t these need a lot of thrust?


Most like the initial H-20s will be equipped by WS-10 non after burning variant ... and why would they need a lot of thrust. The B-2 is powered by four 77 kN F118GE-100 engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

H-20, J-35(?), and CH-5


----------



## bshifter




----------



## Figaro

bshifter said:


> View attachment 706663


Nothing beyond just a strip tease


----------



## bshifter

Figaro said:


> Nothing beyond just a strip tease








Type 00X/003 (former Type 002) Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions


Cropped and enlarged of latest photo. Now it looks indeed to have the first hangar/deck level module fitted!?



defence.pk





this strip tease followed, suggesting H-20 could be unveiled this year


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

_This one is taking far too long to strip.
   _

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Deino

bshifter said:


> View attachment 706663




Just another teasing CG, nothing more.


----------



## nahtanbob

jhungary said:


> To be honest, I never even see why China would develop a Strategic Bomber, tactical bomber maybe, but I honestly do not see why China will need long range Strategic bomber in this stage of the air force progress.
> 
> Strategic bomber have 1 sole purpose only, that is to bomb a target that far away from you. Except that maybe you want to start a nuclear war with bomber, but we hardly do this anymore as we now got the ICBM.
> 
> So, by building a stealth strategic bomber fleet, Chinese Military are declaring an intention of bombing inter-continental strategic target, which does not make sense, especially after the Chinese are very keen on making their 2nd Arty corp. sharper.
> 
> However, when you come down and look at Chinese enemy list, almost all her enemy are near or even neighbour to China, then why would you need a Strategic bomber to begin with.
> 
> And if the bomber intended target is the United States, which mean a total thermonuclear war, then China again, don't need those bomber
> 
> So, is this a warning that China will now starting to **** off small country far away from China like the US now or it's just they **** their money off to something that do not have much of a use again??
> 
> If China are to build a air transport fleet or auxiliary air fleet, I would understand, but building a Strategic bomber at this stage, I don't really understand why



Why operate H-6 ??








Xian H-6 - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## antonius123

jhungary said:


> To be honest, I never even see why China would develop a Strategic Bomber, tactical bomber maybe, but I honestly do not see *why China will need long range Strategic bomber in this stage of the air force progress.*
> 
> Strategic bomber have 1 sole purpose only, that is to bomb a target that far away from you. Except that maybe you want to start a nuclear war with bomber, but we hardly do this anymore as we now got the ICBM.
> 
> So, by building a stealth strategic bomber fleet, Chinese Military are declaring an intention of bombing inter-continental strategic target, which does not make sense, especially after the Chinese are very keen on making their 2nd Arty corp. sharper.
> 
> However, when you come down and look at Chinese enemy list, almost all her enemy are near or even neighbour to China, then why would you need a Strategic bomber to begin with.
> 
> And if the bomber intended target is the United States, which mean a total thermonuclear war, then China again, don't need those bomber
> 
> So, is this a warning that China will now starting to **** off small country far away from China like the US now or it's just they **** their money off to something that do not have much of a use again??
> 
> If China are to build a air transport fleet or auxiliary air fleet, I would understand, but building a Strategic bomber at this stage, I don't really understand why




This is called Nuclear Triad strategy.

The triad gives countries a way to deliver a nuclear attack by land, sea or air. The idea to have these three options was for the purpose of retaliation. If two of the three legs of the triad were destroyed, the third could still have a retaliatory strike.

Yes, China potential nuclear threat will come from far away country: US.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Dudes, why replied to such obsolete posting from *June 2013*? 

At first I thought that I read wrongly why there's such silly post from @jhungary then realized it's made in 2013... long away in the past when every aspect was so much different than today... internal and external to China. And his last posts were in March 2019 covering Christchurch shooting. 

Over years, as China is growing stronger and stronger, this member posted less and less in this corner that I forgot his existence at all  he flags CN (sinisterly, he detests CN) and AU flags

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## aziqbal

J20, Z20, Y20 and final one is H20

we need to see it in 2021 please


antonius123 said:


> This is called Nuclear Triad strategy.
> 
> The triad gives countries a way to deliver a nuclear attack by land, sea or air. The idea to have these three options was for the purpose of retaliation. If two of the three legs of the triad were destroyed, the third could still have a retaliatory strike.
> 
> Yes, China potential nuclear threat will come from far away country: US.



No that is not the only purpose of H20 even a fighter jet can drop a nuclear weapon no big deal

H20 gives China global strike and is the purpose of this programme or any other long range bomber


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

aziqbal said:


> we need to see it in 2021 please


Why do we *need* to see it in 2021? Is this going to be like the LCAC with you? If the H-20 doesn't show up in 2021 (and we have no good reason to believe it will), are you going to go on one of your rants where you call China a failure?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## antonius123

aziqbal said:


> J20, Z20, Y20 and final one is H20
> 
> we need to see it in 2021 please
> 
> 
> No that is not the only purpose of H20 even a fighter jet can drop a nuclear weapon no big deal
> 
> H20 gives China global strike and is the purpose of this programme or any other long range bomber




Triad doctrine will never involve fighter jet to drop nuclear war.
Triad doctrine is strategic doctrine, hence require strategic bomber.


----------



## Deino

Wow ... a H-20 concept with folding tails? How likely is this? Is this realistic in any way or just another fancy and futuristic fan-art? 

(Image via @pupu-2012 from Weibo)

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> Wow ... a H-20 concept with folding tails? How likely is this? Is this realistic in any way or just another fancy and futuristic fan-art?
> 
> (Image via @pupu-2012 from Weibo)
> 
> View attachment 725353


fan art.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## vi-va

Deino said:


> Wow ... a H-20 concept with folding tails? How likely is this? Is this realistic in any way or just another fancy and futuristic fan-art?
> 
> (Image via @pupu-2012 from Weibo)
> 
> View attachment 725353


very unlikely imo

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## FOOLS_NIGHTMARE

A report on China’s new, upcoming bomber paints a picture of a big, stealthy plane capable of flying halfway across the Pacific, laden with up to 45 tons of bombs. The bomber would supplement and eventually replace the H-6, a 1950s-era design that China has steadily upgraded over the decades. 
The H-20 stealth bomber is expected to be unveiled very soon this year. Many images of the bomber have been floating around for a while, the one below is believed to be the correct one that just surfaced today.





A few realtime images also surfaced recently.











__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1393193743096897539

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Should looks similar to B-2 / B-21.


----------



## FOOLS_NIGHTMARE

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Should looks similar to B-2 / B-21.


But more *POTENT*.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

FOOLS_NIGHTMARE said:


> But more *POTENT*.



Maybe. It should supplement H-6K/N which is an ALCM carrier.


----------



## FOOLS_NIGHTMARE

Tai Hai Chen said:


> Maybe. It should supplement H-6K/N which is an ALCM carrier.


It will hopefully, it's also a threat to its US rival the B2 Bomber based in Diego Garcia and Guam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Feng Leng

FOOLS_NIGHTMARE said:


> But more *POTENT*.


Rumors are that it can super-cruise. This may be another example of PLA fielding cutting edge technology before anybody else does the same.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Deino

Feng Leng said:


> Rumors are that it can super-cruise. This may be another example of PLA fielding cutting edge technology before anybody else does the same.




I know these rumours, but sorry, but this is for a flying wing-design comparable to the B-2/-21 a plain ridiculous claim.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sheik

Some nice CG from Chinese magazine Modern Weaponry

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

sheik said:


> View attachment 745107
> 
> 
> View attachment 745108



Looks good.


----------



## batmannow

BDforever said:


> will china sell those bomber to Pakistan and Bangladesh ?


Does BD and Pak needed them? Against whom?


----------



## Han Patriot

Adonis said:


> So even students can't think of something original?... most of these so called Models are copies of existing warplanes of Russian / US origin.


True just like how LCA is a mirage copy. Lolol

Reactions: Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Kruelwrld

Umm wouldn't it not be a flying wing design because it has vertical stabilizers, or would it be considered an flying wing just based off the body design?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Adonis said:


> Why China Can’t Innovate
> 
> 
> Reprint: R1403J China has no lack of entrepreneurs, market demand, or wealth, but can the country succeed in its quest to become the world’s innovation leader? For nearly 40 years, the government has been establishing research programs and high-tech zones, encouraging domestic firms to boost...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hbr.org


Ooo don't get triggered.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## sheik

Kruelwrld said:


> Umm wouldn't it not be a flying wing design because it has vertical stabilizers, or would it be considered an flying wing just based off the body design?



The vertical stabilizers can be lowered to horizontal position to form a complete flying wing.
It's a cool design but difficult to implement probably.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## bshifter

this model is going to sit on my desk huahahahahah

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

bshifter said:


> View attachment 757436
> 
> 
> this model is going to sit on my desk huahahahahah


So they were not lying about the shape.


----------



## Deino

Han Patriot said:


> So they were not lying about the shape.




You know more?


----------



## Deino

Well, now it’s getting interesting… a few days ago a strange tweet again posted that unique model we’ve seen some time ago and now this!

interesting that’s two slightly different images of the same image popped up almost simultaneously… just for completeness here are both!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> To be honest, I never even see why China would develop a Strategic Bomber, tactical bomber maybe, but I honestly do not see why China will need long range Strategic bomber in this stage of the air force progress.
> 
> Strategic bomber have 1 sole purpose only, that is to bomb a target that far away from you. Except that maybe you want to start a nuclear war with bomber, but we hardly do this anymore as we now got the ICBM.
> 
> So, by building a stealth strategic bomber fleet, Chinese Military are declaring an intention of bombing inter-continental strategic target, which does not make sense, especially after the Chinese are very keen on making their 2nd Arty corp. sharper.
> 
> However, when you come down and look at Chinese enemy list, almost all her enemy are near or even neighbour to China, then why would you need a Strategic bomber to begin with.
> 
> And if the bomber intended target is the United States, which mean a total thermonuclear war, then China again, don't need those bomber
> 
> So, is this a warning that China will now starting to **** off small country far away from China like the US now or it's just they **** their money off to something that do not have much of a use again??
> 
> If China are to build a air transport fleet or auxiliary air fleet, I would understand, but building a Strategic bomber at this stage, I don't really understand why


If you review your message 10 years later, can you understand why China developed H20 at that time? 

Look, is H20 coming at the right time? It's neither early nor late.


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> If you review your message 10 years later, can you understand why China developed H20 at that time?
> 
> Look, is H20 coming at the right time? It's neither early nor late.


No. 

Do tell me, which country China so want to bomb that's off the range of their normal bomber range?

You don't have foreign military base, you don't have overseas territories, which mean whatever strategic bomber you have would have to base them in China (or Pakistan, which is same different, as they are next to each other)

Again, as I said 10 years ago, if you are building bomber to try to present as a secondary nuclear strike to US, that may make more sense (Actually not, but lets say it does) I mean are China going to be in a war in some god forsaken African country in the future? Or trying to fight in the middle east? If not, why would China need those bomber??

Just because you have it does not mean it is useful, I still stand by my point, Chinese Strategic bomber is a waste of money. Whatever Chinese enemy in the near future is all close to China, which mean you can already touch with fighter-bomber. 

but then as I said many times, you really should have stick to whatever you are good at (Whatever that is) talking about Military Strategic Goal is not one of your forte.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> No.
> 
> Do tell me, which country China so want to bomb that's off the range of their normal bomber range?
> 
> You don't have foreign military base, you don't have overseas territories, which mean whatever strategic bomber you have would have to base them in China (or Pakistan, which is same different, as they are next to each other)
> 
> Again, as I said 10 years ago, if you are building bomber to try to present as a secondary nuclear strike to US, that may make more sense (Actually not, but lets say it does) I mean are China going to be in a war in some god forsaken African country in the future? Or trying to fight in the middle east? If not, why would China need those bomber??
> 
> Just because you have it does not mean it is useful, I still stand by my point, Chinese Strategic bomber is a waste of money. Whatever Chinese enemy in the near future is all close to China, which mean you can already touch with fighter-bomber.
> 
> but then as I said many times, you really should have stick to whatever you are good at (Whatever that is) talking about Military Strategic Goal is not one of your forte.



Of course, it is to show strength and deterrence, just like the role of B-2. 

Isn't the role of B-2 to show strength and deterrence? Yes, the USA needs to bomb Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Honduras and so on. 

But do you need B-2 to bomb these countries? Isn't the B-52 better? Similarly, China uses H-6, but we also need H-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> Of course, it is to show strength and deterrence, just like the role of B-2.
> 
> Isn't the role of B-2 to show strength and deterrence? Yes, the USA needs to bomb Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Honduras and so on.
> 
> But do you need B-2 to bomb these countries? Isn't the B-52 better? Similarly, China uses H-6, but we also need H-20.


The question is, DO CHINA WANT TO BOMB AFRICA OR MIDDLE EAST?

This is not what B-2 or B-52 do if we are talking about a war in Canada or Mexico or Haiti or Grenada, I don't know what world you live in to think US would use strategic bomber on those country, they are called "Strategic" bomber for a reason.

So no, unless you think in the next 5 to 10 years China will indulge in war and needs to bomb Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Honduras and so on, you don't need Strategic Bomber, and this is not how "Power Projection" done by the way. 

You have them but can't use them is not really power projection. I mean, without forward deploying base, how are you going to use them to send sorties from China? Have 10 refuelling tanker follow it?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Abid123

What happened to the "stealth drone hunter" China was developing for hunting and destroying F-22 and F-35?


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> The question is, DO CHINA WANT TO BOMB AFRICA OR MIDDLE EAST?
> 
> This is not what B-2 or B-52 do if we are talking about a war in Canada or Mexico or Haiti or Grenada, I don't know what world you live in to think US would use strategic bomber on those country, they are called "Strategic" bomber for a reason.
> 
> So no, unless you think in the next 5 to 10 years China will indulge in war and needs to bomb Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Honduras and so on, you don't need Strategic Bomber, and this is not how "Power Projection" done by the way.
> 
> You have them but can't use them is not really power projection. I mean, without forward deploying base, how are you going to use them to send sorties from China? Have 10 refuelling tanker follow it?


I have already said that the role of the H-20 is to demonstrate strength and deterrence, just like the role of the B-2.


----------



## KampfAlwin

jhungary said:


> The question is, DO CHINA WANT TO BOMB AFRICA OR MIDDLE EAST?
> 
> This is not what B-2 or B-52 do if we are talking about a war in Canada or Mexico or Haiti or Grenada, I don't know what world you live in to think US would use strategic bomber on those country, they are called "Strategic" bomber for a reason.
> 
> So no, unless you think in the next 5 to 10 years China will indulge in war and needs to bomb Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Haiti, Grenada, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Honduras and so on, you don't need Strategic Bomber, and this is not how "Power Projection" done by the way.
> 
> You have them but can't use them is not really power projection. I mean, without forward deploying base, how are you going to use them to send sorties from China? Have 10 refuelling tanker follow it?


Your argument is so retarded. That's like saying China or US shouldn't build nukes unless they're planning to nuke the entire world, and they are after all called 'Intercontinental Ballistic Missile'

Also are you basically admitting the US is bombing countries like an imperialist since they have a strategic bomber?


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> I have already said that the role of the H-20 is to demonstrate strength and deterrence, just like the role of the B-2.


And I have already said you can't demonstrate strength if you can't use them.

How are you going to fly your H-20 to US and "Project" your power when you have to sortie out from China? Given the max range is around 8000 KM. You won't even reach Hawaii with that range. How are you going to refuel your bomber? Ask to Hawaii Air National Guard??

We use B-2 because we have base EVERYWHERE, we can put them in Guam and tell you it was there, and it can cover the entire China. We can put them in Diego Garcia and cover the entire Indian Ocean, we can Put them in Aviano and cover the entire North Africa.

How are you going to use the H-20 when you don't have foward deployed land to either base the bomber on or base the Refueller that are going to refuel those bomber when they flew from China? At the present stage, all you can project is around 6000 - 8000km range from China, that's it. It's nothing.....



KampfAlwin said:


> Your argument is so retarded. That's like saying China or US shouldn't build nukes unless they're planning to nuke the entire world, they are after all called 'Intercontinental Ballistic Missile'


And your argument is really retard.

Why would you need strategic bomber that can't reach mainland US when you have ICBM.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> And I have already said you can't demonstrate strength if you can't use them.
> 
> How are you going to fly your H-20 to US and "Project" your power when you have to sortie out from China? Given the max range is around 8000 KM. You won't even reach Hawaii with that range. How are you going to refuel your bomber? Ask to Hawaii Air National Guard??
> 
> We use B-2 because we have base EVERYWHERE, we can put them in Guam and tell you it was there, and it can cover the entire China. We can put them in Diego Garcia and cover the entire Indian Ocean, we can Put them in Aviano and cover the entire North Africa.
> 
> How are you going to use the H-20 when you don't have foward deployed land to either base the bomber on or base the Refueller that are going to refuel those bomber when they flew from China? At the present stage, all you can project is around 6000 - 8000km range from China, that's it. It's nothing.....
> 
> 
> And your argument is really retard.
> 
> Why would you need strategic bomber that can't reach mainland US when you have ICBM.


We can bomb Guam, Hawaii, Okinawa and South Korea with H-20.
Bomb all US bases near China that can deploy B-2.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> We can bomb Guam, Hawaii, Okinawa and South Korea with H-20.
> Bomb all US bases near China that can deploy B-2.


Dude, you can already bomb Guam and South Korea with your own fighter bomber or even with the DF-Whatever missile you claim you would, so why you will need H-20? And you can't bomb hawaii, that's too far from you, again, how are you going to do it, you flew your H-20 with 10 refueller like the Black Bucks Raid?

And lol, bomb Guam and Hawaii, you do know that will trigger NATO article 5, right? You want to fight the entire Europe + Canada and US? Be my guest. That's not power projection, that's suicide. Real life has consequence, it's not like you just type it on the internet and go "China bomb [insert country name here]"

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> Dude, you can already bomb Guam and South Korea with your own fighter bomber or even with the DF-Whatever missile you claim you would, so why you will need H-20? And you can't bomb hawaii, that's too far from you, again, how are you going to do it, you flew your H-20 with 10 refueller like the Black Bucks Raid?
> 
> And lol, bomb Guam and Hawaii, you do know that will trigger NATO article 5, right? You want to fight the entire Europe + Canada and US? Be my guest. That's not power projection, that's suicide. Real life has consequence, it's not like you just type it on the internet and go "China bomb [insert country name here]"


The number of missiles is limited, and it will be cheaper to use the H-20. As for NATO, B-2 bombed China. Will China still care about NATO? 
And as long as the USA is destroyed, will other NATO countries continue to participate in the war? 
China faced the entire United Nations army in the Korean War, but it was the Americans who really fought with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> The number of missiles is limited, and it will be cheaper to use the H-20. As for NATO, B-2 bombed China. Will China still care about NATO?
> And as long as the USA is destroyed, will other NATO countries continue to participate in the war?
> China faced the entire United Nations army in the Korean War, but it was the Americans who really fought with us.


lol, I don't know how cheap you think you can build a H-20, it will not be cheaper than missile. 

And lol, it's funny you think US can be destroyed with China standing....

All I can say is, if US and China is at war. B-2 or H-20 is not really a major selling point of that war. Because if that is the case, as I said, you are looking at a Thermonuclear exchange. A few B-2 or H-20 here and there will not change anything. Or do you think US will think twice before getting into a war with China because of a few H-20 if we are already ready to go all in with nuclear option??

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> lol, I don't know how cheap you think you can build a H-20, it will not be cheaper than missile.
> 
> And lol, it's funny you think US can be destroyed with China standing....
> 
> All I can say is, if US and China is at war. B-2 or H-20 is not really a major selling point of that war. Because if that is the case, as I said, you are looking at a Thermonuclear exchange. A few B-2 or H-20 here and there will not change anything. Or do you think US will think twice before getting into a war with China because of a few H-20 if we are already ready to go all in with nuclear option??


I know that if China and USA are at war, the H-20 and B-2 are of little use, and the real war will be nuclear weapons. 
That's why I said that the role of the H-20 is to show strength and deterrence, which is the same as that of the B-2.
You first brought China and USA into the topic, not me.

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> I know that if China and USA are at war, the H-20 and B-2 are of little use, and the real war will be nuclear weapons.
> That's why I said that the role of the H-20 is to show strength and deterrence, which is the same as that of the B-2.
> You first brought China and USA into the topic, not me.


Again, what kind of deterrence do you think you can get on the US if the US is *WILLING *to go nuclear on you?

And again, what kind of deterrence it can be if it can *NEVER REACH *US Mainland??

Also, I didn't bring this up, you did, I said in my original post, China have no use of a strategic bomber because all Chinese perceived enemy is close to China. I never bring USA or power projection in the topic, you did.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> Again, what kind of deterrence do you think you can get on the US if the US is *WILLING *to go nuclear on you?
> 
> And again, what kind of deterrence it can be if it can *NEVER REACH *US Mainland??
> 
> Also, I didn't bring this up, you did, I said in my original post, China have no use of a strategic bomber because all Chinese perceived enemy is close to China. I never bring USA or power projection in the topic, you did.


China also has nuclear weapons, and China's nuclear weapons are more powerful hydrogen bombs. China has DF-41, strategic nuclear submarine and other nuclear weapon launch platforms, as well as orbital bombing platforms and hypersonic weapons. How can the USA prevent China from projecting nuclear weapons? 

Of course, the USA has more nuclear weapons. But do you think Russia will not join the nuclear war?

Moreover, China has a large number of large-scale refuge facilities. Once a nuclear war breaks out, China is confident that it will have the largest number of nuclear war survivors after the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> China also has nuclear weapons, and China's nuclear weapons are more powerful hydrogen bombs. China has DF-41, strategic nuclear submarine and other nuclear weapon launch platforms, as well as orbital bombing platforms and hypersonic weapons. How can the USA prevent China from projecting nuclear weapons?
> 
> Of course, the USA has more nuclear weapons. But do you think Russia will not join the nuclear war?
> 
> Moreover, China has a large number of large-scale refuge facilities. Once a nuclear war breaks out, China is confident that it will have the largest number of nuclear war survivors after the war.


Do you just derailed your own post about H-20 and gone into talking about Nuclear War?

Nuclear War would have no winner. US and Russia alone have enough nuclear weapon to destroy the world, not just China, but the world, 13 times over. So what do you think will happen if US and China are really engage into nuclear war?

Also, it's never about surviving nuclear war is a problem, but surviving the aftermath. How would you live if you don't have drinking water coming to your tap, and it is contaminated? How about all infrastructure destroy where you will need to hunt for food instead of going to a supermarket because it went up in the blast? Do you know how to hunt? That is even if there are "food" you can get to begin with. Where do you get those from when all the packaging plant is destroyed? How are you going to feed the survivor? You are lucky if your next-door neighbour did not kill you outright to get what you had. 

dude, don't say stuff that you have no idea, even I am trained with survival skill as an Army Ranger and I can survive in the bush for months, and even I will have problem surviving in a post nuclear apocalyptic world, do you think you can survive? Even if you can survive the initial blast?

It's dumb for anyone to think anyone can "win" in any form after a thermonuclear war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> Do you just derailed your own post about H-20 and gone into talking about Nuclear War?
> 
> Nuclear War would have no winner. US and Russia alone have enough nuclear weapon to destroy the world, not just China, but the world, 13 times over. So what do you think will happen if US and China are really engage into nuclear war?
> 
> Also, it's never about surviving nuclear war is a problem, but surviving the aftermath. How would you live if you don't have drinking water coming to your tap, and it is contaminated? How about all infrastructure destroy where you will need to hunt for food instead of going to a supermarket because it went up in the blast? Do you know how to hunt? That is even if there are "food" you can get to begin with. Where do you get those from when all the packaging plant is destroyed? How are you going to feed the survivor? You are lucky if your next-door neighbour did not kill you outright to get what you had.
> 
> dude, don't say stuff that you have no idea, even I am trained with survival skill as an Army Ranger and I can survive in the bush for months, and even I will have problem surviving in a post nuclear apocalyptic world, do you think you can survive? Even if you can survive the initial blast?
> 
> It's dumb for anyone to think anyone can "win" in any form after a thermonuclear war.


I'm just responding to you saying that "China cannot throw nuclear weapons at the USA". This is the first time I have heard such a statement. 

I have already said that the H-20 and B-2 are not useful in the war between nuclear powers, but they are inferior to the B-52 and H-6 in the war between large and small countries. So their role is to show strength and deterrence.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jhungary

MH.Yang said:


> I'm just responding to you saying that "China cannot throw nuclear weapons at the USA". This is the first time I have heard such a statement.
> 
> I have already said that the H-20 and B-2 are not useful in the war between nuclear powers, but they are inferior to the B-52 and H-6 in the war between large and small countries. So their role is to show strength and deterrence.


Where did I say "China cannot throw nuclear weapons at the USA"? Point it out, where exactly I said that?

And again, how much deterrence you can get if you cannot forward deploy it? I have asked you like 4 times, and you had not answer me once.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MH.Yang

jhungary said:


> Wow, your English really sucks, aren't you?
> 
> The first point is talking about how H-20 can be deterrent if US already willing to go nuclear.
> 
> The second point is talking about how H-20 can be deterrent if it cannot reach US mainland.
> 
> I mean, we were talking about H-20, not nuclear missile. Unless you have some senile moment and forgot what we had talked about in the last 10 post, that, I have no comment.


I agree with the first point. If we enter a nuclear war, conventional weapons have no deterrent power. I do not agree with the second point. The U.S. forces in Hiroshima, Hawaii, Okinawa, South Korea and other places are within the range of attack of the H-20, which is the deterrent force. In addition, the H-20 can also deter other countries, such as Japan and India. Just as the B-2 is also deterring Iran and other countries.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

Guys … could you leave out politics? 
By the way, a third image appeared

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Deino

Some news … 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561972223530999809
My current overall conclusion, as it seems, my first impressions is correct or much likely: it is some sort of PR stunt to gain attention and even more to distract from the real thing grows stronger and stronger … so let’s wait for the real one.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Super Falcon

They look very futuristic next generation


----------



## Ali_Baba

Deino said:


> Well, now it’s getting interesting… a few days ago a strange tweet again posted that unique model we’ve seen some time ago and now this!
> 
> interesting that’s two slightly different images of the same image popped up almost simultaneously… just for completeness here are both!
> 
> View attachment 872588
> View attachment 872589



Those picture do suggest to me that the tail fin can go vertical if extra stability is required during certain parts of the flight regime and are moveable just like the J20's tail fins are. Interesting design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> Some news …
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1561972223530999809
> My current overall conclusion, as it seems, my first impressions is correct or much likely: it is some sort of PR stunt to gain attention and even more to distract from the real thing grows stronger and stronger … so let’s wait for the real one.


What do you mean by distract from the real things grows stronger and stronger? Why do they even need to do that?


----------



## Deino

flowerfan2020 said:


> Mod must fell asleep.




Mod is in vacation

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Deino

Brainsucker said:


> What do you mean by distract from the real things grows stronger and stronger? Why do they even need to do that?




The real thing in the meaning of "I don't expect this to be the real and final configuration"!


----------



## gambit

Ali_Baba said:


> Those picture do suggest to me that the tail fin can go vertical if extra stability is required during certain parts of the flight regime and are moveable just like the J20's tail fins are. Interesting design.


Basically, variable geometry in the yaw axis. The reason why the US moved from variable geometry flight controls system is that the gains are not worth it. See the F-111 (my first assignment) and the F-14. For what you are speculating, since the flying wing design do not have an empennage section, now there must be an extension to house the necessary pneudraulics to actuate the rear stabs. Going full vertical would create the dreaded corner reflector, see RCS verbotten features. Changing the rear stabs to vertical would also necessitate RCS altering physical structures in that area, so now there must be (re)design of that section to minimize RCS contribution. As the rear stabs translate from one axis to the next, the flight controls software must be written to incorporate the aerodynamics effects of that change because as the stabs once had full control in roll, now it has less roll and more yaw. Not impossible to do, but see if it is worth it.


----------



## Deino

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583100221638443008

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IblinI

Deino said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583100221638443008


Not gonna happened in this year.


----------



## FuturePAF

Rainbow 7 or H-20?


----------



## White and Green with M/S

FuturePAF said:


> Rainbow 7 or H-20?


I think its not H20 because I can see one engine may be its new stealth ucav

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## monitor

WarplanePorn

@warplane_porn
·
2h

Alleged image of the Chinese H-20 stealth bomber preforming flight testing. If this is to be confirmed real, it would be the first ever sighting of the mysterious aircraft since the projects's initial disclosure in 2016 [427 x 640] from /u/Papppi-56 at #… https://bit.ly/3sfVNvF


----------



## IblinI

monitor said:


> WarplanePorn
> @warplane_porn
> ·
> 2h
> 
> Alleged image of the Chinese H-20 stealth bomber preforming flight testing. If this is to be confirmed real, it would be the first ever sighting of the mysterious aircraft since the projects's initial disclosure in 2016 [427 x 640] from /u/Papppi-56 at #… https://bit.ly/3sfVNvF
> 
> View attachment 888496


it is a B2.


----------



## etylo

IblinI said:


> it is a B2.


Does US ever paint their air force planes yellow color ? I think only Chinese paint yellow on their testing military airplanes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FuturePAF

The B-21 is set to be revealed December 2nd. Any indication the H-20 will be revealed before then? Perhaps at Zhuhai?


----------



## casual

FuturePAF said:


> The B-21 is set to be revealed December 2nd. Any indication the H-20 will be revealed before then? Perhaps at Zhuhai?


Definitely not at zhuhai. But maybe some satellites will catch a glimpse of it at xian.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mili

FuturePAF said:


> The B-21 is set to be revealed December 2nd. Any indication the H-20 will be revealed before then? Perhaps at Zhuhai?



uss ford was launched almost a decade ago but magically became 'operational' few months b4 Fujian launch. 
H20 will definitely appear soon after b21. One thing usa good at lately is to be 'ahead' of China. lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------

