China DOESN'T buy the Backfire...

[Grey Havoc]

True, but I was assuming for the sake of maximum possible fleet size that the H-6K was an even higher priority program than the Y-20 and Il-76 programs. I wouldn't be surprised though, if in actuality the KJ-2000 program has an equal or higher priority to the H-6K.

 

[flateric]

 

[Grey Havoc]

That cat is probably the most recognisable creature on this planet by now.

 

[2IDSGT]

Good? Actually, the thought of China building H-6Ks in numbers is more worrisome than a few Backfires, especially if they sort out their engine manufacturing issues and start exporting the things. A simple, long-range, subsonic airframe combined with modern avionics/standoff weapons makes for an area-denial asset that could be within the price-range of just about anyone looking to make life hard for the USN.

 

[flanker]

Seen many exports of H-6's lately?

Exactly.

 

[2IDSGT]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130131/DEFREG03/301310016/China-8217-s-Future-Bomber-Requirements-Murky?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

China’s Future Bomber Requirements Murky

China’s future bomber aircraft requirements appear murky as Western analysts — stuck with reading tea leaves in an opaque pond — battle over what it all means...

 

[kaiserbill]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130131/DEFREG03/301310016/China-8217-s-Future-Bomber-Requirements-Murky?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

China’s Future Bomber Requirements Murky

China’s future bomber aircraft requirements appear murky as Western analysts — stuck with reading tea leaves in an opaque pond — battle over what it all means...

I don't know what to make of that article.

Specifically, there are unconfirmed reports that China and Russia are working
on deals that include refurbished Tupolev Tu-22M3 Backfire long-range strategic
bombers and Sukhoi Su-34 fighter-bombers.

No.

...is that China’s military is upgrading its Xian H-6 medium-range bomber, a
licensed variant of the Tu-16. The upgrade, known as the H-6K, includes a
re-engineered Russian NPO Saturn D-30KP turbofan engine, larger air intakes,
die-electric nose radome and a redesigned flight deck. The engines boost its
range to 3,500 kilometers and allow it to carry both land-attack cruise missiles
and anti-ship cruise missiles.

Range of 3500km?
They seem to be confusing range and radius of action.
The Tu-16 and H-6 already do twice this on the original turbojet engines.
The vanilla Tu-16 and H-6 could carry cruise-missiles decades ago, with the original engines.

Dean Cheng, a China specialist at the Heritage Foundation, said that another
reason the Tu-22M3 would be of little interest to China is that the JH-7
fighter-bomber has characteristics and payload comparable to the Tu-22M3

Errr ....... what?

The article makes these points above, and also contradicts them at the same time.

 

[2IDSGT]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130131/DEFREG03/301310016/China-8217-s-Future-Bomber-Requirements-Murky?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

China’s Future Bomber Requirements Murky

China’s future bomber aircraft requirements appear murky as Western analysts — stuck with reading tea leaves in an opaque pond — battle over what it all means...

I don't know what to make of that article.

Key word is "murky."

 

[chuck4]

"Murky" is no excuse for muddying the water further.

 

[2IDSGT]

"Murky" is no excuse for muddying the water further.

Do feel free to clear it up for everyone.

 

[chuck4]

"Murky" is no excuse for muddying the water further.

Do feel free to clear it up for everyone.

There is no Backfire deal. Now that is a little less murky - there will no supersonic theater strike capability from China for at least 10-15 years.

 

[2IDSGT]

"Murky" is no excuse for muddying the water further.

Do feel free to clear it up for everyone.

There is no Backfire deal. Now that is a little less murky - there will no supersonic theater strike capability from China for at least 10-15 years.

Wow, you must have read a whole paragraph of the article (Backfire is only briefly mentioned).

 

[chuck4]

"Murky" is no excuse for muddying the water further.

Do feel free to clear it up for everyone.

There is no Backfire deal. Now that is a little less murky - there will no supersonic theater strike capability from China for at least 10-15 years.

Wow, you must have read a whole paragraph of the article (Backfire is only briefly mentioned).

You mean an article with gems like this actually has more insights to offer?

"JH-7 fighter-bomber has characteristics and payload comparable to the Tu-22M3 "

;D ;D ;D

 

[2IDSGT]

You mean an article with gems like this actually has more insights to offer?

"JH-7 fighter-bomber has characteristics and payload comparable to the Tu-22M3 "

;D ;D ;D

Like I said, briefly mentioned (that is quite a gem though, maybe he meant the super-duper stealthified JH-7 ).