Should PLAAF or PLAN have bought the Tu-22M Backfire?

[vi-va]

We don't know if H-20 is like B2 or B21.
It should be revealed in near future.

A little bigger than B2.

 

[PeacefulWar]

A little bigger than B2.

Really? How creditable is the source?
If true, it's a long range Strategic Bomber。

 

[Paul2]

why are we using H-6K then? it is far worse in terms of performance. Unmanned also can't take on roles of AWAC, tanker, etc. anyhow, this is more for historical purpose, since AVIC now is producing H-20.

I will weight in on your side, but first some corrections:

I think unmanned will make a better tanker, or AWACS, since you don't have to carry a huge cabin capsule, and water bags in it that need food, water, and place to poop.

The problem with stealth vehicles is that they are freaking heavy. You either carry stealth RAM, or you carry bombs, no choice in between. The RAM on stealth planes is basically rubber with a lot Fe3O4 powder mixed in.

There is a third option, but it's not viable for China at the moment: you put huge enough engines to carry both bombs, and RAM.

There is only one country on this planet that had a military supersonic engine with >200kn dry thrust.

I want to stress that it only "had" it. Russia has lost the industry capable on building NK-25 as was with AL-41, R-179, and NK-32. What they can make now are heavily derated versions of those engines with inferior materials, and can't even talk about advancing the designs further.

 

[Paul2]

The problem with Tu-22M3 is it's not versatile. That's why PLAN went for Su-30MKK2 which can fire anti ship missiles just the same but is at the same time multi role.

Range man, range...

The bigger is your plane, the further it flies.

The big problem with those island bases is that you kind of need to ...... defend them! And do so 1000km away from the closes military strong point, while everybody around wants to set an incredible bounty of few billions in military hardware, concentrated on 1km², on fire.

 

[Figaro]

A little bigger than B2.

How do we know this?

No our fighter jets are unfortunately no longer numerous as they were during the cold war hopeful the PLA has mercy on us.

Vietnam should purchase Su-35. Not only does Vietnam still at least need token deterrence against China, it also should defend itself against someone like Indonesia, which also has Su-35. Vietnam is very well off economically ... I'm not sure why they are not importing more modern military equipment. If I'm not mistaken, Vietnam and Indonesia aren't exactly the best of friends.

 

[vi-va]

How do we know this?

Vietnam should purchase Su-35. Not only does Vietnam still at least need token deterrence against China, it also should defend itself against someone like Indonesia, which also has Su-35. Vietnam is very well off economically ... I'm not sure why they are not importing more modern military equipment. If I'm not mistaken, Vietnam and Indonesia aren't exactly the best of friends.

Because I knew.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

you can't be fast enough with AAM chasing you. not fast enough in next decade when hypersonic missile is ready.
Speed is one attribute of warfare, lower priority compare with stealthy.
Stealth can penetrate, speed was able to penetrate, but no more.

speed for bombers is not for evading defense anymore - the supersonic bombers now don't even carry bombs anymore and use exclusively standoff weapons. Tu-160 for example carries 2x rotary launchers for 12x long range missiles, no bombs.

it is for reaction time, covering large areas while on patrol and to allow it to serve as a recon platform with powerful radars, which is why both Tu-22 and Tu-160 have electronic warfare and strategic recon variants.

I will weight in on your side, but first some corrections:

I think unmanned will make a better tanker, or AWACS, since you don't have to carry a huge cabin capsule, and water bags in it that need food, water, and place to poop.

The problem with stealth vehicles is that they are freaking heavy. You either carry stealth RAM, or you carry bombs, no choice in between. The RAM on stealth planes is basically rubber with a lot Fe3O4 powder mixed in.

There is a third option, but it's not viable for China at the moment: you put huge enough engines to carry both bombs, and RAM.

There is only one country on this planet that had a military supersonic engine with >200kn dry thrust.

Tanker, as drone, maybe. AWAC as drone? I don't think so. AWAC isn't just a recon asset, it is a command asset.

I agree with the second part, but there can still be RCS reduction via shaping.

 

[vi-va]

speed for bombers is not for evading defense anymore - the supersonic bombers now don't even carry bombs anymore and use exclusively standoff weapons. Tu-160 for example carries 2x rotary launchers for 12x long range missiles, no bombs.

it is for reaction time, covering large areas while on patrol and to allow it to serve as a recon platform with powerful radars, which is why both Tu-22 and Tu-160 have electronic warfare and strategic recon variants.



Tanker, as drone, maybe. AWAC as drone? I don't think so. AWAC isn't just a recon asset, it is a command asset.

I agree with the second part, but there can still be RCS reduction via shaping.

Supersonic do have better reaction time as long as you can take off.

Supersonic design pay a high price for lower payload, heavier empty weight, not stealthy, high maintenance (most B1B is in hangar only), readiness sucks.

If supersonic with variable sweep wing, it's a nightmare of maintenance.

Those side effects make supersonic bling bling, but not practical. How many Tu-160 Russia has? Just more than a dozen. How many new Tu-160 Russia built? None.

Balance budget, readiness, pros and cons. Subsonic stealthy, no brainer.

 

[Viet]

How do we know this?

Vietnam should purchase Su-35. Not only does Vietnam still at least need token deterrence against China, it also should defend itself against someone like Indonesia, which also has Su-35. Vietnam is very well off economically ... I'm not sure why they are not importing more modern military equipment. If I'm not mistaken, Vietnam and Indonesia aren't exactly the best of friends.

Indonesia has canceled su35 purchase.
Our top priority is economy. We let others to bankrupt themselves with weapon purchases. That we successfully lured the US return to Asia is worth 100 Su35. Instead of investing in more fighter jets Vietnam invests more in domestic air defense systems.

Only few stuffs are bought. the SPIDER is the recent acquisition.

 

[Paul2]

I will weight in on your side, but first some corrections:

I think unmanned will make a better tanker, or AWACS, since you don't have to carry a huge cabin capsule, and water bags in it that need food, water, and place to poop.

The problem with stealth vehicles is that they are freaking heavy. You either carry stealth RAM, or you carry bombs, no choice in between. The RAM on stealth planes is basically rubber with a lot Fe3O4 powder mixed in.

There is a third option, but it's not viable for China at the moment: you put huge enough engines to carry both bombs, and RAM.

There is only one country on this planet that had a military supersonic engine with >200kn dry thrust.

I want to stress that it only "had" it. Russia has lost the industry capable on building NK-25 as was with AL-41, R-179, and NK-32. What they can make now are heavily derated versions of those engines with inferior materials, and can't even talk about advancing the designs further.

Tanker, as drone, maybe. AWAC as drone? I don't think so. AWAC isn't just a recon asset, it is a command asset.

Why have we spent billions on those military satcom satellites? The command is best to sit away from harms way, in deep bunkers, away from strategic weapons, and bunker busters.

The closer you can hold your AWACS to aerial "frontlines" the better it is for the radar it carries. Imagine losing a plane packed with colonels, and major generals when we have so few proper senior cadres, just because they needed to fly closer to get a better vision.

This is especially important when more, and more long range anti-radiation missiles are being deployed, and ECM role of AWACS plane subjects them to attack by missiles with "home-on-jam" function, which are also getting more, and more widespread.

Air war is not a land war. Mission objectives largely don't change for the duration of the mission, and you don't want to chat on the phone with your general if something really drastic happens during the mission, and needs an immediate response. Satcom gear today is cheap, and small enough for every piece of military equipment to carry.

I agree with the second part, but there can still be RCS reduction via shaping.

Yes, you can, but:

1. The plane will fly like a brick
2. You still can't do anything with facet edges on the structure "ringing" to the extend that can make stealth concept work today. You think that the best paid engineers in the world have not though of that? Pretty much all work in the domain of military aircraft research with stealth is about reducing the weight penalty of RAMs.

 

[Paul2]

Those side effects make supersonic bling bling, but not practical. How many Tu-160 Russia has? Just more than a dozen. How many new Tu-160 Russia built? None.

Because they cannot. Russian military industry is less than 1/10th of what it was during the union.

Any high tech piece they make today is with off the shelf parts, because their high tech supply chains have disintegrated when the union dissolved, and half of their defence industry stayed in Ukerain.

 

[大汉奸柳传志]

I'd buy it just for the look.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Why have we spent billions on those military satcom satellites? The command is best to sit away from harms way, in deep bunkers, away from strategic weapons, and bunker busters.

The closer you can hold your AWACS closer to aerial "frontlines" the better it is for the radar it carries. Imagine losing a plane packed with colonels, and major generals when we had so few proper senior cadres.

Air war is not a land war. Mission objectives largely don't change for the duration of the mission, and you don't want to chat on the phone with your general if something really drastic happens during the mission, and needs an immediate response.

Yes, you can, but:

1. The plane will fly like a brick
2. You still can't do anything with metal edges on the structure "ringing"

strategic command sits in the bunker, but tactical command typically needs greater situational awareness. USAF AWACs typically host tactical command elements. A general sitting in a bunker isn't going to be telling individual fighters who to shoot at.

 

[Paul2]

strategic command sits in the bunker, but tactical command typically needs greater situational awareness. USAF AWACs typically host tactical command elements. A general sitting in a bunker isn't going to be telling individual fighters who to shoot at.

What situational awareness you speak of? Beyond visual range, your only source of information about the enemy are dots on the radar screen.

A general sitting in a bunker isn't going to be telling individual fighters who to shoot at.

Why losing any, if you can avoid them at all? To my knowledge, even a single colonel with non-zero mass of grey matter is big of enough loss, as airforce keeps them flying into their late forties.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

What situational awareness you speak of? Beyond visual range, your only source of information about the enemy are dots on the radar screen.

Why losing any, if you can avoid them at all? To my knowledge, even a single colonel with non-zero mass of grey matter is big of enough loss, as airforce keeps them flying into their late forties.

Why does USAF put command staff in AWACs? One reason is that even in the case of satellite communications being disrupted or ground stations being taken out, coordination via UHF radio can still be maintained through a flying command post. That is the situational awareness - if long range comms go down, tactical communications and command is still intact if commanders are physically on planes.

Why are planes turned to drones? Size, expendability, maneuverability. AWACs are large, are NOT expendable by any means, and have no need to be maneuverable.