dark light

Blockade Runner

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 posts - 31 through 36 (of 36 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2662726
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    They could buy the Su-32 itself or make something similar. Variable wing is simply a no go for the Chinese due to its maintenance complexity. Just remember that the Chinese cancelled all their VG projects.

    But if China isn’t building a lot of these planes, they are better off just buying from the Russians.

    Best course for the Chinese is to develop a stealthy fighter bomber, using two WS-10A engines as a standpoint. The plane will have fixed wings and twin canted rudders. The plane should double also as a Flanker and Su-30 replacement.

    While I have your ear, let me ask you this. When do you think China will deploy some prototype of the J-12? Thanks

    in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2662731
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    What makes you think they would attack Guam? China’s more immediate targets would be to strike Taiwan which is much closer. Backfires heading to Guam would have been intercepted, and the damage you could would only be so little. Su-30s are in a much better position to protect themselves.

    Knock out US airbases, know out the US’ ability to intervene in the Taiwan Strait.

    Let me ask you another question. (I have seen some of your posts on other BBS and it was very impressive, which is why I direct my questions specifically at you. 😉 ) Do you think that the US could somehow get its F-22 to do a constant combat air patrol over the Taiwan Strait (with inflight refeuling)?

    I don’t see anything on the Tu-22M3 that could refute AEGIS or carrier aerial escorts, with Super Hornets with AMRAAMs, much like Tomcats with Phoenixes.

    It would need Flanker escorts and then it could drop cruise missiles.

    China might need something bigger than the Krypton, but the Russians would never sell anything with a range of over 300km. This is due to the treaties they themselves have signed.

    Shouldn’t China start working on that, even if it has to build its own? Another question for you. If US carriers go behind Taiwan and intervene in the Taiwan Strait (in a war scenario) do you think the Tu-16 can hit them?

    Also another thing is that the PLA is rightly concentrating on greater numbers of fewer planes types, rather than dispersing its shock effectivity by having too many different plane types. Better to have a lot more squads of Su-30s or similarly classed aircraft than having a few Backfires.

    Simply going with stealthy fighter bombers e.g. like the J-12 would be so much better.

    That’s rational.

    in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2662831
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    That’s not the point. You don’t need dedicated bombers at this point. Would the Tu-22M2 be superior over the Tu-16 in carrying cruise missiles? Would it make any difference?

    Fighter bombers today make up the brunt of all bombing work the last 20 years or so. Look at the tonnage dropped by the F-16, F-18, F-14 and F-15 strike Eagles against that was dropped by the B-1B. Even B-52s have proven to remain more useful. China already got its Su-30MKKs, Su-27s and J-11s, even J-10s.

    I think about that bomber in terms of the size of the missile it can carry and the range it can hit out to. I see this as valuable as an attack on US carrier groups or on dropping cruise missiles that could hit Guam. Granted these I can only imagine the US will eventually deploy to Guam). However, China has to eventually develop this kind of bomber. It’s like a rung on a ladder, or a step on a path. One has to pass that point some time.

    I do think China needs something with more range than Su-30MK2 and something with a more powerful and longer range missile than Krypton.

    It’s not the point that is better than the Tu-16 either. But the point is, is it better than the projected H-X the Chinese themselves are working on? The Chinese have not been impressed with VG wing mechanisms, their fragility, bulkiness, and of their maintenance requirements. The whole plane itself is not stealthy. Call it what you will, but it remains a cold war relic. The Chinese are better off trying to design a subsonic very low observable bomber with fixed wings that they themselves could deploy after 2010.

    H-X just has two more hardpoints than Tu-16, with some upgraded avionics maybe? From an economic standpoint prioritizing something like J-12 or fighters this could make sense. However, Tu-16 seems to me to be slow, and is a smaller bomber, which means that it can carry weapons will less range, which means it has to get closer to its target, decreasing the chance of accomplishing its mission.

    in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2662837
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    Not something that outdated.

    What do you think is China’s best move for something to replace Tu-16? The new speculation on the Chinese version of Su-32?

    in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2663227
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    Not something that outdated.

    But it’s a big step forward from the Tu-16 in terms of speed, payload and range, isn’t it?

    in reply to: Russia to sell Strategic Bombers to China #2663344
    Blockade Runner
    Participant

    When China considered Backfires back in the nineties, the Russian General Staff was opposed to it. Up to now, there are still officials in the Russian government that is still opposed to the sale of strategic weapons to China, considering China still a strategic competitor and potential enemy. The Chinese and the Russian export agency have built an entire arms procurement strategy based around this. The Chinese are not going to trust the Russians on such matters, fearing that the Russians would bug or cripple the aircraft.

    In any case, the Chinese Tu-16s are merely used as cruise missile launchers. Backfires are not going to be better on this mediocre role.

    China tends to avoid provocative arms purchases in trying to keep some sense of harmony with its neighbors. The Sovremannies, Kilos and the Su-30MKKs are enough to test the boundaries of these controversiality. They are not going to push this one level higher AKA by purchasing Slavas, Akulas, and Backfires.

    As far as what the Chinese is going to do is to take a serious look at the aircraft (as if they’re buying it), but in reality are just gathering enough information to set the parameters for their own H-6 replacement.

    Bombers are only as good as the stuff they carry. What do you propose that Chinese Backfires should carry to help deter US carrier groups? If that is the case, why can’t such missiles be already carried by Su-30MKKs, JH-7As or H-6s?

    There are also many questions about logistics, service, and support. China seems happy enough with the Sovies and the Kilos but not on the Su’s. I don’t think the PLAAF would be willing to take the additional logistical burden of carrying a new plane and engine type. I also want to make clear to everyone on board that China never buys used and second hand stuff for their own armed service regardless of how many hours you have on the frame. They’re (the Chinese officials) are truly fixated on the idea that things they buy must always be new. This fixation is simply not a point to be questioned, discussed or debated. They want it that way and that’s final. (The only used stuff they buy either goes to the scrapyard or gets studied by engineers).

    Before, it was the Chinese who knock on the Russians door to buy weapons. Now it’s the Russians knocking the Chinese doors to sell weapons. Huh? Are the Russians really concerned that the EU might actually lift its embargo?

    crobato,

    But don’t you think China would like to import a few just to get the engine technology and whatever other technologies it is interested in?

Viewing 6 posts - 31 through 36 (of 36 total)