Back in 2001, there were indications that China wanted to buy 32 Backfire bombers from Russia. A deal at the time which could have been up to $1 biillion dollars. There was mention of this hope as early as 1998.
It seems now that sometime in 2010, China just decided to instead, buy the Russian production line for the jet.
A move by Russia to sell its production line of Tu-22M3 long-range bombers to China for US$1.5 billion to China was confirmed by the US-based US-China Economic and Security Review Commission two years ago and the bomber's name will be changed to the Hong-10, reports the state-run China News Service.
The Chinese name for their version of the Backfire (version is important because it is bound to have PLAAF specific items in it) is expected to fly in the second half of next year.
---
UPDATE: Google translate Chinese to English, this source says the H-10 "is expected to go into production next year". Different from the above first-flight mention.
--
The continent purchase Backfire bomber production line put into operation next year will be called the H -10
At 12:36 on June 15th, 2012
Aging bomber fleet replacement of old, the Chinese mainland to Russia for $ 1.5 billion purchase of Tu-22M3 Backfire (Backfire) long-range bomber production line, named "H -10", is expected to go into production next year, combat The deployment of 36.
According to Japan's "Sankei Shimbun" reported that, after the end of the Cold War, the continent had financial difficulties in Russia express willingness to buy the Tu-22M bombers, but would undermine the military balance in East Asia, Russia grounds to refuse.
After years of fight, Russia agreed to sell $ 1.5 billion Backfire bomber production line is expected to go into production next year, the actual deployment of 36, the People's Liberation Army into the military after named "H -10". As early as two years ago, the hearings held by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission is responsible for assessing the safety of US exchanges (The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), has confirmed the deal.
Tu-22M3 bombers maximum combat radius of 2880 kilometers, took off from mainland China in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and even the activities of the Western Pacific, is expected to be a serious threat to the safety of the air defense of the Western Pacific countries.
22 comments:
What's the point of having such rather specialised aircraft if you can transport all modern weaponry under a Su-27 family aircraft?
The Chinese "need" a Su-34 derivative, not Cold War scare bombers.
SO, have a look at the map of the Pacific.
Gee it is a big place, slightly larger than Europe.
Interesting but not surprising since this would be a substantial if not perfect counterfoil / counterplay to the American ASB Strategy and the more recent 'Pivot'.
Let's see what other evidence turns up.
BTW, IIRC, the Hi-Hi-Hi radius of a Tu-22M3 Backfire C is 4,500 km/2,430 NMI with three Kh-22M Burya / AS-4 Kitchen 250 NMI range Mach 3 cruise missiles with anti-ship or land attack seekers and thermobaric warheads.
Hope they have good escorts..
"Hope they have good escorts.."
Yep, may run into a legacy or Super.Oh,my goodness, in 2022 may also leave an F35 in it's trail.
By 2022, the KC30 may even be in service, so that they can actually fly more than a radius of 2 to 3 hundred miles plus.
Well, it will need some long legged escorts to be survivable over its radius.
Like SO mentioned, SU-34 would seem to be a more obvious choice. Own radar and missiles.
"Well, it will need some long legged escorts to be survivable over its radius."
It till have standoff weapons.
The F35 nor Hornet will be able to get anywhwere near it.
@anon2:
Think about refuelling aircraft in flight - that's not a Western monopoly.
Su-34 crew can stand and walk in the cockpit and has a toilet. Su-34 can be refuelled in the air, and in principle all transport aircraft can be converted to tankers upon mobilization.
Su-34 has much better capabilities than a Tu bomber unless you want multiple Yakhont-sized missiles.
The Su-34 does not have a toilet. And the F-111 still has longer legs. OK, had.
737 has longer legs again if it's going to use standoff weapons...
With a smaller military budget, China is pursuing military parity or even superiority over the US and seems well on its way, while we are squandering billions of dollars on obsolete systems such as the LCS. In its 3000 mile underground tunnel complex, China is assembling new strategic and tactical nuclear weapons while we are unilaterally retiring our ICBMs and even don't allow the fielding of nuclear warheads. Soon, we will not have the knowledge base how to build nukes.
We don't have supersonic cruise and antiship missiles. Our tomahawk missiles are outdated and easily defeatible. We are completely asleep at the wheel strategically and soon may have to pay the price.
We could have a stronger military for less money if strategic thinking was allowed. More tactical nukes have a great deterrenece value even if we close our overseas bases.
We could do with a 250 ship Navy if 100 of those ships would be nuclear and non-nuclear subs. Limit the F-35 buy and restart production of an upgraded maybe larger F-22. Build or buy new missiles. MBDA has the meteor missile which seems superior to the expensive AIM120D and has fielded the Perseus antiship missile concept.
What is scary is that neither the White House or the Pentagon or the Democratic leadership or the Republican leadership have an honest discussion about the possibility of a Cold War similar to what we had with the Soviet Union. Romney/Ryan are not getting it either. It seems we are outmatched this time (so is the rest of the West)
@SO?:
How about doing at least a google check before asserting a counterfactual?
"Su-34 has much better capabilities than a Tu bomber unless you want multiple Yakhont-sized missiles"
Er, exactly.
You do not want your primary asset subject to contact witht he defences?
Maybe everything is different in the Euro zone?
(have a look at a map of the Western Pacfic.Austria is not actually Australia, a mistake often made by those who have never heard of the Pacfic)
A 'B-1R' type variant of the H-10 could prove to be an even greater game-changer to yet a further accelerating shift in the balance of power.
Instead of USAF's speculative NGB Program gamble -- which will either create a possible replacement bomber in unknown quantities, or result in a bust -- perhaps they should contemplate a B-1B+ line re-tooling, later to be updated to a B-1R type? The modernized B-1B variant R&D could include funding towards an engine upgrade to durable GE-132 motor and latest off-the-shelf avionics and cockpit?
Anon2, what's your strawman argument crap about? What are you babbling about Austria?
The Su-34 is a much more versatile aircraft than a Backfire, can fly about as fast, can carry a Moskit or Yakhont missile or at least three Kayak missiles, the crew can endure very long missions (even F-16C pilots were capable of missions over Afghanistan while being based in Kuwait!) and it has both a good range by itself and a refuelling probe.
It could sweep the Western Pacific from MPA, SigInt aircraft presence with its air combat capabilities as well as engage an AEW&C or tanker occasionally.
A Su-34 is furthermore not exactly prey, but rather a peer for a Super Hornet. A squadron could push a Super Hornet CAP flight away and force it to either run directly or expend its MRAAM armament before it runs. A Backfire on the other hand could only run itself.
The PRC can easily convert hundreds of civilian transport and passenger aircraft into tankers (in addition to regular tankers), so there will be enough aerial refuelling capacity when needed.
Hehe, you should tell Airbus how easy it is to convert airliners to tankers! ;)
What we can expect is that the Chinese already have a plan in place to upgrade the their "indigenous" Backfire's much like the changes made to the different Flankers variants now in production (J-11B/BS/J-15, etc).
These changes will include substantial use of composite components/airframe, all glass cockpits with advanced avionics, AESA radar, sat communications, sophisticated computers/code, and the full use of Chinese missile systems.
I also won't be surprised if the existing intakes are replaced with DSI units specifically designed for the Backfire.
A production J-20 would be a perfect fighter escort for a Chinese Backfire.
This is just one more weapons system in a growing arsenal of threats aimed directly at the US military bases in the Pacific.
The big question in my mind is how long can the US continue down the present road of an aging fighter force without a modern air superiority fighter in production such as the Raptor?
This entire story is a fake build around a nonsense internet rumour, that first appeared in 2005 and then again in 2010. I am somewhat astonished, that this blog really fell for it. There is zero credibility to this story. If anyone doubts that, they should ask the obvious: how is it, that an obscure newspaper cites two-year old reports by another obscure source, yet cannot present any more recent observations on the matter?! Heck, Chinas top-priority J-20 program is seeing more frequent coverage..
Para, actualy the Chinese Govt make no secret of their palns to acquire such an aircraft.
So, i agree with others, the Pacific and Indian Oceans are a big place. The Americans seem to thing that the B1,B2 and B52 are more suitable.
Carry "lots" of standoff weapons and stay out of the way.
Folks! The WestPac is not China's only interest. Think India, think Indian Ocean, think *strategic* like deploying heavy Chinese bombers to Africa or other places. Accept that China will soon be a global geostrategic competitor. A heavy bomber is just one tool for that.
@para:
I won't be so quick to dismiss these reports. I remember back when the J-10 was considered a fictional product of Photoshop by Chinese fanboys.
I think what we are seeing is that the Chinese are interested but the Russians are hesitant. One day, the rumor would come true.
@SO
It is true that a unmodified Backfire is vulnerable. On the other hand, with a will in these days of multifunction radars, if so desired it could be armed with a variety of weapons that would give it reasonable defensive capabilities.
Post a Comment