Pentagon Confirms China Will Have A New Tactical Bomber
which is pretty much firewalled.................. 
On Aviation Week - a long, speculative article.
http://chinese-military-aviation.***...rcraft-ii.html
cheers
What does it say about the new bomber??
Thread Starter
Some people are just so impatient... 
PS - I think the authors thought they were being paid per word!
In World War II, a fighter-bomber was a fighter that could bomb. They can all bomb now, so the term has fallen out of use—except in China, where it is used for strike aircraft with high flight performance but no serious air-to-air capability.
That is a good clue to the nature of a forthcoming Chinese tactical bomber. Emergence of this type, a smaller companion to the Xian H-20 strategic bomber, has long been rumored but is only now discussed by the Pentagon—which variously calls it a medium-range bomber, a tactical bomber and, tellingly, a fighter-bomber. The terminology, a few scant details and the likely choice of engines suggest that the aircraft will be conceptually similar to the retired U.S. F-111, but maybe a lot bigger and perhaps presenting a serious threat to air targets.
This new Chinese aircraft and the H-20 will “probably” not be initially operational before 2025, says the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in its annual China Military Power report, released on Jan. 15. They will both be stealthy, it adds, though that feature almost goes without saying these days and is in any case imprecisely defined.
In a chart setting out characteristics of Chinese military aircraft, the DIA credits the tactical bomber with an active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, long-range air-to-air missiles and precision-guided munitions. The “long-range bomber”—meaning the H-20—will have an AESA and precision-guided munitions, but not long-range air-to-air missiles, the DIA says.
“These new bombers will have additional capabilities, with full-spectrum upgrades compared with current operational bomber fleets, and will employ many fifth-generation fighter technologies in their design,” the DIA says.
Whether the Chinese can make the bombers highly stealthy must be a matter of speculation. “Stealth is far more than the shape of an outer moldline and material coatings,” says Mark Gunzinger, a senior fellow at the U.S. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, discussing the prospective Chinese aircraft. It is also necessary to integrate “pretty advanced technologies to detect and avoid threats,” he says.
China’s moves to build up a powerful bomber force over the past decade or so has been a strategic surprise; it revives the old Soviet approach of warding off U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups by threatening them with massed standoff missile attack. The first step in this strategy was improvement and further production of China’s version of the Soviet Tupolev Tu-16 medium bomber—the H-6, built by Avic’s Xian Aircraft. Like the Boeing B-52, this subsonic and easily detected aircraft must rely on long-range cruise missiles to safely attack well-defended targets.
The H-20 will bring low detectability and greater range to the strike force, but probably not much improvement in flight performance. A senior Chinese air force official confirmed its long-rumored development program in 2016; the Pentagon acknowledged its existence the following year. In 2018 there was official Chinese confirmation of the H-20 name, a semiofficial statement that flight testing was imminent, and an obviously deliberate revelation of a crude picture showing a long-span, subsonic design.
For several years, Chinese and foreign media have speculated about the existence of a separate project to develop a replacement for the Avic Xian JH-7, a supersonic, fighter-size strike aircraft. In line with China’s former, less ambitious defense policy, JH-7s threaten enemy ships close to the country’s coast, not far out in the Pacific.
The forthcoming tactical bomber need not be a replacement for either the H-6 or JH-7, says Gunzinger, formerly deputy assistant secretary of defense for forces transformation and resources. “They have a different mindset than [the U.S.] do when it comes to military systems. We seem to develop a bomber fairly infrequently and only one model because it’s fairly expensive.” China is more open to developing new bombers and upgrading older ones at the same time, he says.
The missions for Chinese bombers are widening. As the H-20 enters service next decade, the DIA expects China’s bomber force to be assigned to nuclear strike, creating a U.S.-style nuclear triad by augmenting the capabilities of Chinese submarines and ground-based rockets. “As of 2017, the air force had been reassigned a nuclear mission, probably with a developmental strategic bomber,” the DIA says. This does not mean the bombers will cease to be nonnuclear threats to U.S. and Japanese ships and ground installations.
The expected Chinese tactical bomber has commonly been called the JH-XX. J stands for jian and H for hong—abbreviations for the Chinese words for fighter and bomber. So JH means fighter-bomber. In Chinese terms, the F-111 would have been a fighter-bomber, even though it could hardly fight.
Two low-bypass turbofans of likely size for the tactical bomber are known: the WS-10 Taihang, which powers the J-10 fighter and generates a reported 132 kN (30,000 lb.-thrust); and the new WS-15, which the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong has reported is the engine of the J-20 fighter and is almost ready for volume production.
In a promotional flyer, Shanghai conference organizer Galleon said in 2012 that the WS-15, then under development, would produce a thrust of 180 kN (40,000 lb.), no doubt with afterburning. Since Galleon was working with the Chinese engine industry on the promoted conference, the data almost certainly came from an official source that wanted it disclosed. The WS-15 was probably unable to generate 180 kN at first—as suggested by details of a derivative high-bypass engine, the SF-A—but that rating should at least have been the final target and could have been accepted for a 2020s tactical bomber.
A twin-engine configuration for the aircraft is highly likely, so the available engine sizes suggest it will have something like 264 kN or 360 kN of thrust, the exact figure depending on whether designers have needed more output from the chosen engine or preferred to derate it.
If a WS-15 installation is combined with the F-111F’s thrust loading (mass compared with thrust, strongly affecting flight performance), the Chinese tactical bomber would have a gross weight of 72 metric tons (160,000 lb.), making it 60% larger than the old U.S. type. At the lower end of the scale, a WS-10 engine set combined with the JH-7’s relatively low thrust loading (and therefore high performance) results in a gross weight of 41 metric tons; in that case the tactical bomber would be a little smaller than the F-111. Other combinations of thrust loading and engine type give intermediate sizes.
The smallest size seems unlikely, because of the DIA’s reference to the aircraft as having medium range, in comparison with a strategic bomber’s long range. A highly powered 41-metric-ton aircraft is not likely to achieve anything like the “medium” range of the H-6K. The medium-range description also probably rules out the possibility of the tactical bomber having a new and relatively small engine.
The “fighter-bomber” designation sets an upper limit on the possible size of the aircraft. Conceivably, a twin WS-15 installation could be combined with a high thrust loading, like that of the Tupolev Tu-22M3 supersonic medium bomber. In that case the aircraft would have a gross weight of 90 metric tons—but neither the Chinese nor the Pentagon could call that a fighter-bomber.
The ability to carry long-range air-to-air missiles suggests a secondary role in attacking aircraft: purely self-defense missiles on strike aircraft have short or medium range. A large and costly aircraft such as the new tactical bomber could not normally be risked in air combat, but in 2016 China revealed a huge air-to-air missile with a range that should greatly exceed 200 km (120 mi.)—enough to create firing opportunities at safe distances from enemy fighters. Likely targets for the weapon are sluggish support aircraft, such as those engaged in surveillance (AW&ST Dec. 5-25, 2016, p. 31 and Oct. 29-Nov. 11, 2018, p. 58).
As a stealthy medium-range strike aircraft, the tactical bomber should be unique. The U.S. Air Force has analyzed such a concept in the form of the FB-22, based on the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, and the initial design of the Long-Range Strike–Bomber, but did not launch development. Since the retirement of the F-111, Western air forces have depended on comparatively short-range, adapted fighters with little passive ability to avoid radar detection, such as the Boeing F-15E. Russia still operates the Sukhoi Su-24, similar to the F-111, but its main tactical strike aircraft is the fighter-based Su-34.
Although a Pentagon report to Congress in August 2018 said the Chinese fighter fleet had about 2,000 combat aircraft, the new report by the DIA lowers the estimate by 15% to around 1,700 aircraft. Modernizing its forces, China is retiring many old fighters of doubtful value.
That is a good clue to the nature of a forthcoming Chinese tactical bomber. Emergence of this type, a smaller companion to the Xian H-20 strategic bomber, has long been rumored but is only now discussed by the Pentagon—which variously calls it a medium-range bomber, a tactical bomber and, tellingly, a fighter-bomber. The terminology, a few scant details and the likely choice of engines suggest that the aircraft will be conceptually similar to the retired U.S. F-111, but maybe a lot bigger and perhaps presenting a serious threat to air targets.
This new Chinese aircraft and the H-20 will “probably” not be initially operational before 2025, says the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in its annual China Military Power report, released on Jan. 15. They will both be stealthy, it adds, though that feature almost goes without saying these days and is in any case imprecisely defined.
In a chart setting out characteristics of Chinese military aircraft, the DIA credits the tactical bomber with an active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, long-range air-to-air missiles and precision-guided munitions. The “long-range bomber”—meaning the H-20—will have an AESA and precision-guided munitions, but not long-range air-to-air missiles, the DIA says.
“These new bombers will have additional capabilities, with full-spectrum upgrades compared with current operational bomber fleets, and will employ many fifth-generation fighter technologies in their design,” the DIA says.
Whether the Chinese can make the bombers highly stealthy must be a matter of speculation. “Stealth is far more than the shape of an outer moldline and material coatings,” says Mark Gunzinger, a senior fellow at the U.S. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, discussing the prospective Chinese aircraft. It is also necessary to integrate “pretty advanced technologies to detect and avoid threats,” he says.
China’s moves to build up a powerful bomber force over the past decade or so has been a strategic surprise; it revives the old Soviet approach of warding off U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups by threatening them with massed standoff missile attack. The first step in this strategy was improvement and further production of China’s version of the Soviet Tupolev Tu-16 medium bomber—the H-6, built by Avic’s Xian Aircraft. Like the Boeing B-52, this subsonic and easily detected aircraft must rely on long-range cruise missiles to safely attack well-defended targets.
The H-20 will bring low detectability and greater range to the strike force, but probably not much improvement in flight performance. A senior Chinese air force official confirmed its long-rumored development program in 2016; the Pentagon acknowledged its existence the following year. In 2018 there was official Chinese confirmation of the H-20 name, a semiofficial statement that flight testing was imminent, and an obviously deliberate revelation of a crude picture showing a long-span, subsonic design.
For several years, Chinese and foreign media have speculated about the existence of a separate project to develop a replacement for the Avic Xian JH-7, a supersonic, fighter-size strike aircraft. In line with China’s former, less ambitious defense policy, JH-7s threaten enemy ships close to the country’s coast, not far out in the Pacific.
The forthcoming tactical bomber need not be a replacement for either the H-6 or JH-7, says Gunzinger, formerly deputy assistant secretary of defense for forces transformation and resources. “They have a different mindset than [the U.S.] do when it comes to military systems. We seem to develop a bomber fairly infrequently and only one model because it’s fairly expensive.” China is more open to developing new bombers and upgrading older ones at the same time, he says.
The missions for Chinese bombers are widening. As the H-20 enters service next decade, the DIA expects China’s bomber force to be assigned to nuclear strike, creating a U.S.-style nuclear triad by augmenting the capabilities of Chinese submarines and ground-based rockets. “As of 2017, the air force had been reassigned a nuclear mission, probably with a developmental strategic bomber,” the DIA says. This does not mean the bombers will cease to be nonnuclear threats to U.S. and Japanese ships and ground installations.
The expected Chinese tactical bomber has commonly been called the JH-XX. J stands for jian and H for hong—abbreviations for the Chinese words for fighter and bomber. So JH means fighter-bomber. In Chinese terms, the F-111 would have been a fighter-bomber, even though it could hardly fight.
Two low-bypass turbofans of likely size for the tactical bomber are known: the WS-10 Taihang, which powers the J-10 fighter and generates a reported 132 kN (30,000 lb.-thrust); and the new WS-15, which the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong has reported is the engine of the J-20 fighter and is almost ready for volume production.
In a promotional flyer, Shanghai conference organizer Galleon said in 2012 that the WS-15, then under development, would produce a thrust of 180 kN (40,000 lb.), no doubt with afterburning. Since Galleon was working with the Chinese engine industry on the promoted conference, the data almost certainly came from an official source that wanted it disclosed. The WS-15 was probably unable to generate 180 kN at first—as suggested by details of a derivative high-bypass engine, the SF-A—but that rating should at least have been the final target and could have been accepted for a 2020s tactical bomber.
A twin-engine configuration for the aircraft is highly likely, so the available engine sizes suggest it will have something like 264 kN or 360 kN of thrust, the exact figure depending on whether designers have needed more output from the chosen engine or preferred to derate it.
If a WS-15 installation is combined with the F-111F’s thrust loading (mass compared with thrust, strongly affecting flight performance), the Chinese tactical bomber would have a gross weight of 72 metric tons (160,000 lb.), making it 60% larger than the old U.S. type. At the lower end of the scale, a WS-10 engine set combined with the JH-7’s relatively low thrust loading (and therefore high performance) results in a gross weight of 41 metric tons; in that case the tactical bomber would be a little smaller than the F-111. Other combinations of thrust loading and engine type give intermediate sizes.
The smallest size seems unlikely, because of the DIA’s reference to the aircraft as having medium range, in comparison with a strategic bomber’s long range. A highly powered 41-metric-ton aircraft is not likely to achieve anything like the “medium” range of the H-6K. The medium-range description also probably rules out the possibility of the tactical bomber having a new and relatively small engine.
The “fighter-bomber” designation sets an upper limit on the possible size of the aircraft. Conceivably, a twin WS-15 installation could be combined with a high thrust loading, like that of the Tupolev Tu-22M3 supersonic medium bomber. In that case the aircraft would have a gross weight of 90 metric tons—but neither the Chinese nor the Pentagon could call that a fighter-bomber.
The ability to carry long-range air-to-air missiles suggests a secondary role in attacking aircraft: purely self-defense missiles on strike aircraft have short or medium range. A large and costly aircraft such as the new tactical bomber could not normally be risked in air combat, but in 2016 China revealed a huge air-to-air missile with a range that should greatly exceed 200 km (120 mi.)—enough to create firing opportunities at safe distances from enemy fighters. Likely targets for the weapon are sluggish support aircraft, such as those engaged in surveillance (AW&ST Dec. 5-25, 2016, p. 31 and Oct. 29-Nov. 11, 2018, p. 58).
As a stealthy medium-range strike aircraft, the tactical bomber should be unique. The U.S. Air Force has analyzed such a concept in the form of the FB-22, based on the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, and the initial design of the Long-Range Strike–Bomber, but did not launch development. Since the retirement of the F-111, Western air forces have depended on comparatively short-range, adapted fighters with little passive ability to avoid radar detection, such as the Boeing F-15E. Russia still operates the Sukhoi Su-24, similar to the F-111, but its main tactical strike aircraft is the fighter-based Su-34.
Although a Pentagon report to Congress in August 2018 said the Chinese fighter fleet had about 2,000 combat aircraft, the new report by the DIA lowers the estimate by 15% to around 1,700 aircraft. Modernizing its forces, China is retiring many old fighters of doubtful value.
