Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One of the 2 new plane projects of 2013 from China

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • vario2012
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Nov 2012
    • 68

    One of the 2 new plane projects of 2013 from China

    This is allegedly one of the 2 new prototypes to take maiden flight in 2013
  • Jollyrogers
    Cut the BS, give me facts
    • Jan 2000
    • 180

    #2
    Of all the PLAAF airfleet modernisation, only their bomber fleet looks antiquated.

    It's just a matter of time that a Chinese-equivalent of the B2 comes about....or remember that RQ-170 that came down in Iran? Already there were rumors that Chinese engineers were asking to take a look at that machine.

    Comment

    • Deino
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2000
      • 4229

      #3
      First of all two questions or things to consider !

      1. This is not a Chinese-equivalent of the B2 ... at best similar to the X-47B.

      2. What will be the second of these two new projects to be unveiled in 2013 ?


      Deino
      ...

      He was my North, my South, my East and West,
      My working week and my Sunday rest,
      My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
      I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

      The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
      Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
      Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
      For nothing now can ever come to any good.
      -------------------------------------------------
      W.H.Auden (1945)

      Comment

      • Portagee
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Nov 2007
        • 598

        #4
        If the black blob on the right at the hanger door is a person then it's not very big. The nose of the aircraft would only be head high.

        At best a sub scale model

        Comment

        • thobbes
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Sep 2010
          • 2116

          #5
          Originally posted by Jollyrogers View Post
          Of all the PLAAF airfleet modernisation, only their bomber fleet looks antiquated.
          Both the Yanks and the Russians use some quite old bombers themselves - B-52 and Tu-95.
          "It will be so loud that if we move in next door to you, your lawn will die".
          Lemmy on Motorhead

          Comment

          • TR1
            TR1
            http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
            • Oct 2010
            • 9826

            #6
            Originally posted by thobbes View Post
            Both the Yanks and the Russians use some quite old bombers themselves - B-52 and Tu-95.
            True, but they also both use far more modern planes.

            The Chinese bomber force is pretty much all antiquated.
            sigpic

            Comment

            • thinkplum
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Dec 2010
              • 134

              #7
              Bomber is a costy(in terms of maintenace & safty of the crew) aggresive weapon, whose fire range can be covered by balistic missles/cruise missles/fighter-bombers/long range rocketry artilllery.

              I dont think wasting time and money on stealthy bombers is a wise desicion once you master the 100+ tons class transporters. Spend it on AWACS or sth else.

              Comment

              • Blitzo
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Jan 2011
                • 1332

                #8
                Originally posted by Portagee View Post
                If the black blob on the right at the hanger door is a person then it's not very big. The nose of the aircraft would only be head high.

                At best a sub scale model
                If that blob is indeed a person, it would be similar in size to X-47b

                Comment

                • thinkplum
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Dec 2010
                  • 134

                  #9
                  X-47bs is either a stealth UAV that carries more ammunition or a reuseable reprogramable cluster cruise missle. At least at this stage, it can't beat human pilots in dog fights.

                  Comment

                  • davidwangqi
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Oct 2011
                    • 40

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Blitzo View Post
                    If that blob is indeed a person, it would be similar in size to X-47b
                    If this person is around 1.7m tall, I'd guess the wingspan of this thing could be around 10x1.7m. so possibly a little smaller than x47b but definitely larger than Dassault nEUROn which has quite similar shape with it based on previous reports.

                    Comment

                    • RpR
                      RpR
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jan 2013
                      • 1128

                      #11
                      Originally posted by thinkplum View Post
                      Bomber is a costy(in terms of maintenace & safty of the crew) aggresive weapon, whose fire range can be covered by balistic missles/cruise missles/fighter-bombers/long range rocketry artilllery.

                      I dont think wasting time and money on stealthy bombers is a wise desicion once you master the 100+ tons class transporters. Spend it on AWACS or sth else.
                      There is no fighter-bomber, cruise missle, etc. that can come close to delivering the mass tons of bombs a Blackjack, B-2 or even B-52 can deliver.
                      If you are a grunt on the ground and need heavy air support you would be exceptionally glad they still exist.

                      Comment

                      • Rii
                        Rii
                        Senior Member
                        • Oct 2010
                        • 3449

                        #12
                        Originally posted by RpR View Post
                        There is no fighter-bomber, cruise missle, etc. that can come close to delivering the mass tons of bombs a Blackjack, B-2 or even B-52 can deliver.

                        If you are a grunt on the ground and need heavy air support you would be exceptionally glad they still exist.
                        With Blackjack especially I'd be worried it was about to drop a nuke or carpet bomb my own position...

                        Comment

                        • TR1
                          TR1
                          http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                          • Oct 2010
                          • 9826

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Rii View Post
                          With Blackjack especially I'd be worried it was about to drop a nuke or carpet bomb my own position...
                          Yeah the Blackjack is very proficient in both roles.

                          sigpic

                          Comment

                          • thinkplum
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Dec 2010
                            • 134

                            #14
                            Originally posted by RpR View Post
                            There is no fighter-bomber, cruise missle, etc. that can come close to delivering the mass tons of bombs a Blackjack, B-2 or even B-52 can deliver.
                            If you are a grunt on the ground and need heavy air support you would be exceptionally glad they still exist.
                            but before they turn their big butts back and heading your location, you will probably be served by enemy artilleries first.

                            And that solves the mystery why they call you a grunt.
                            Last edited by thinkplum; 8th March 2013, 06:58.

                            Comment

                            • Deino
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jan 2000
                              • 4229

                              #15
                              hhhm ....and can we please stay on the topic ?? YES, the B-52 is fine, the Tu-95/142 too and the Tu-160 even more ... but what the hell has this to to to the topic ???

                              Deino
                              ...

                              He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                              My working week and my Sunday rest,
                              My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                              I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                              The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                              Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                              Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                              For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                              -------------------------------------------------
                              W.H.Auden (1945)

                              Comment

                              • Rii
                                Rii
                                Senior Member
                                • Oct 2010
                                • 3449

                                #16
                                It kinda sucks that all these aircraft look the same. Although it certainly demonstrates that similar requirements paired with similar levels of technology generate similar solutions.

                                I wonder who'll be next to join the UCAV game: Japan, Korea, Turkey... Brazil? Does Israel have something in this armed/subsonic/turbofan/VLO category?
                                Last edited by Rii; 8th March 2013, 11:32.

                                Comment

                                • bring_it_on
                                  2005-year of the RAPTOR!!
                                  • Jun 2004
                                  • 12480

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Rii View Post
                                  It kinda sucks that all these aircraft look the same. Although it certainly demonstrates that similar requirements paired with similar levels of technology generate similar solutions.

                                  I wonder who'll be next in the game: Japan, Korea, Turkey... Brazil?

                                  The thing that will eventually seperate such systems, would be the INSIDE, the software, the architectur brain and the sensor suite. That is what will determine the tricks it can perform such as autonomous operations (Without DL), Carrier ops, Multiple mountable missions etc. US is not going in for such aircraft (X-45, X47 type) so its upto europe and who so ever is next to make maximum use .
                                  Old radar types never die; they just phased array

                                  Comment

                                  • Rii
                                    Rii
                                    Senior Member
                                    • Oct 2010
                                    • 3449

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by bring_it_on View Post
                                    The thing that will eventually seperate such systems, would be the INSIDE, the software, the architectur brain and the sensor suite.
                                    Yes, yes, but that is all very boring to lay observer, at least once you get past the first capability/acronym layer (e.g. 'has LPI').

                                    US is not going in for such aircraft (X-45, X47 type) so its upto europe and who so ever is next to make maximum use .
                                    Wot? No intention of following X-47 with production aircraft?

                                    Comment

                                    • djcross
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Jan 2000
                                      • 5466

                                      #19
                                      I would speculate it is a maritime reconnaissance UAV similar in concept to MQ-4C Triton. Except it would be stealthy and could get close enough to geolocate carrier strike groups for attack by ballistic missiles and cruise missile armed JH-7s and H-6s

                                      Originally posted by Rii View Post
                                      Wot? No intention of following X-47 with production aircraft?
                                      US Navy has repeatedly stated that X-47 is only an experiment with no follow-on operational capability. Pentagon has dictated the Navy's role. Any UAV flown off a ship will be used for counter terrorism. That is not an X-47 like UAV.
                                      Last edited by djcross; 8th March 2013, 12:25.

                                      Comment

                                      • Jō Asakura
                                        多聞天
                                        • Jan 2011
                                        • 1302

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by bring_it_on View Post
                                        The thing that will eventually seperate such systems, would be the INSIDE, the software, the architectur brain and the sensor suite. That is what will determine the tricks it can perform such as autonomous operations (Without DL), Carrier ops, Multiple mountable missions etc. US is not going in for such aircraft (X-45, X47 type) so its upto europe and who so ever is next to make maximum use .
                                        Whosoever has the best software engineers- wins (as hardware is or will be available COTS).

                                        I wouldn't hold your breath on truly autonomous systems, if you mean anything more than pre-programmed flight/strike profiles with relatively basic threat avoidance and target discrimination/prioritisation due to sensor fusion.

                                        There will be a 'man in the loop' for a long, long time to come and so called 'artificial intelligence' systems are likely to be a huge anti-climax, if one hopes for 'hollywood style' platforms.

                                        Here the eminent physicist Sir Roger Penrose explains why, from 0:38mins

                                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5XYf1GJBhg

                                        Am I reading this right?! There are NO plans for series production of the X-47B!! I'm hugely disappointed (it's my favourite US aircraft).
                                        sigpic

                                        Comment

                                        Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                        Collapse

                                         

                                        Working...
                                        X