Chinese Stealth bomber program - XAC H-X (H-20)

Let's find out the origin of this picture, and if it appeared before the first photos of the J-36 and J-50, then it can be used to recreate the bomber's appearance.
 

Attachments

  • 7567567.JPG
    7567567.JPG
    170.2 KB · Views: 86
Hydroman said:
The B-2 uses the GE F118 engine which is a derivative of the GE F110 turbofan. Due to our serpentine inlet configuration and that a single, split inlet fed air to two engines, compressor stalls were a risk to the USAF so a lot of ground testing was performed on a test rig at EAFB early on in the program.

When I was at the CTF at EAFB during the main flight test program, we hammered the hell out of these engines at various altitudes and up to max AOA and AOS simultaneously with rapid throttle bursts to each engine and we had no compressor stalls, USAF was very happy about that. We did have inlet air flow distortion (had to live with that) but the goal was no compressor stalls across the entire operating envelope. The F118 is rated at 19000 lbs of non-installed thrust but we lost thrust due to the serpentine inlet and exhaust configurations and again, design induced.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the apocryphal tale told to young FTE's and CGO's in the 419th about how our beloved Test Director Lou Setter (RIP, throw a nickel on the grass, one of the original U-2 pilots) asked the unasked question, "What happens if both engines on one side get shot? The plane still flies right? We have a test plan to show this, right?" The rumor was it didn't exist until Lou asked the question, probably one of the 10% truth/Jeremiah Weed associated stories, but I digress from the topic at hand...
 
I cannot imagine any multi engined aircraft surviving a failure of two engines in one side? Would not the result be a little pre ordained? Give the individuals background, I assume I’m missing some context or knowledge to properly understand the statement.
 
Josh_TN said:
I cannot imagine any multi engined aircraft surviving a failure of two engines in one side? Would not the result be a little pre ordained? Give the individuals background, I assume I’m missing some context or knowledge to properly understand the statement.
Click to expand...
They did the test, the B-2 has the yaw authority to survive. As stated, Lou was an original U-2 pilot, knew Francis Gary Powers, retired as an O-6 from the Air Force. He was a test director in the 419th well into his 80's, retired in 2017 (again?) before he passed in 2019. Phenomenal, individual, aviator, professional, one of those guys you feel honored to say, "I worked with him on..."
 
Sounds like an amazing man.

I am surprised by the test result though.

ETA: if survival of two engine outs on one side was possible, that certainly explains the adoption of a twin configuration in B-21. I would have thought asymmetrical thrust would be problematic.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
I cannot imagine any multi engined aircraft surviving a failure of two engines in one side? Would not the result be a little pre ordained? Give the individuals background, I assume I’m missing some context or knowledge to properly understand the statement.
Click to expand...
B-52 lost four engines on one side and landed safely. (Two lost, as in, one engine exploded and the pod separated) and two uncontrollable and shut down through fuel starvation.
 
Josh_TN said:
Sounds like an amazing man.

I am surprised by the test result though.

ETA: if survival of two engine outs on one side was possible, that certainly explains the adoption of a twin configuration in B-21. I would have thought asymmetrical thrust would be problematic.
Click to expand...
Why? Twins have been flying for over a century, raise the dead brother (opposite rudder and all that other stuff...), weight dependent of course and all of the other quweep. SIOP consideration, you really don't have to land, just get somewhere (tropical island, with lots of attractive natives, lol ;)) to do a controlled ejection.
 
Last edited:
aim9xray said:
B-52 lost four engines on one side and landed safely. (Two lost, as in, one engine exploded and the pod separated) and two uncontrollable and shut down through fuel starvation.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I thought that was a death sentence for any kind of lateral control.
 
mkellytx said:
Why? Twins have been flying for over a century, raise the dead brother (opposite rudder and all that other stuff...), weight dependent of course and all of the other quweep. SIOP consideration, you really don't have to land, just get somewhere (tropical island, with lots of attractive natives, lol ;)) to do a controlled ejection.
Click to expand...

I thought bombers, and in particular the B-52, were more temperamental than civilian aircraft which have more generous control/lift surfaces and less constrained airflows. And I thought flying wings had control issues already that required unique surfaces and fly by wire even in good times. All out on one side just seemed counter intuitive to me…could the B-1 do it?
 
Josh_TN said:
I thought bombers, and in particular the B-52, were more temperamental than civilian aircraft which have more generous control/lift surfaces and less constrained airflows. And I thought flying wings had control issues already that required unique surfaces and fly by wire even in good times. All out on one side just seemed counter intuitive to me…could the B-1 do it?
Click to expand...
So, losing a whole pod was a serious emergency, the Good Book is available online so you can read the weights, EP's and speeds that the BUFF becomes a "widow maker."

Flying wings, physics is physics, maintain enough q, you can maintain directional control. The million dollar question is if this is enough umph to safely land on a 10-12kft runway... LOL, honestly, I vote for the tropical Island...
 
mkellytx said:
They did the test, the B-2 has the yaw authority to survive. As stated, Lou was an original U-2 pilot, knew Francis Gary Powers, retired as an O-6 from the Air Force. He was a test director in the 419th well into his 80's, retired in 2017 (again?) before he passed in 2019. Phenomenal, individual, aviator, professional, one of those guys you feel honored to say, "I worked with him on..."
Click to expand...
I miss Lou, worked with and known for a long time and he passed well into his 90's. He told about when he got "sheep dipped" into the CIA for the U-2 program, lots of great stories. Lou was Francis Gary Powers instructor pilot.

If a B-2 gets shot at and loses two engines on one side, the plane was seen, so better pull the handles because the plane is toast.
 
aim9xray said:
B-52 lost four engines on one side and landed safely. (Two lost, as in, one engine exploded and the pod separated) and two uncontrollable and shut down through fuel starvation.
Click to expand...
They never did find the pilot or copilot's seat cushions though... poor pilots were puckered so tight that the seat cushion just vanished!



mkellytx said:
Flying wings, physics is physics, maintain enough q, you can maintain directional control. The million dollar question is if this is enough umph to safely land on a 10-12kft runway... LOL, honestly, I vote for the tropical Island...
Click to expand...
If you've had to drop a SIOP load, you might as well aim for a nice tropical island. Not going to be anything left of the US.
 
Hydroman said:
I miss Lou, worked with and known for a long time and he passed well into his 90's. He told about when he got "sheep dipped" into the CIA for the U-2 program, lots of great stories. Lou was Francis Gary Powers instructor pilot.

If a B-2 gets shot at and loses two engines on one side, the plane was seen, so better pull the handles because the plane is toast.
Click to expand...
So, do I, he was a class act. It was an incredible privilege to hear the stories you mentioned from him.

All joking aside, Lou at least knew there were plenty of non-combat reasons to do his recommended test. All of the shooting out engines was a bunch of patch wearing engineers (FTE's) trying to impress the Lt's.
 
As someone said (Sweetman? Trimble?) "any article having headiline like this has an answer "No."
www.airandspaceforces.com

Has China’s Secret H-20 Stealth Bomber Broken Cover?

If new internet imagery is authentic, China is flying a new, large aircraft which may be its long-in-development H-20 stealth bomber.
www.airandspaceforces.com www.airandspaceforces.com
How he could buy that video as something to write about?
 
Looking at the video, of what is supposedly known, the J-16 fighter flying chase, does not look like a J-16 from any angle in the video. Nor does it look like any other known Chinese fighter aircraft. Which leads me to believe that its some kind of CGI or AI generated video superimposed on a video of someone panning a camera around in their back yard.
 
Dynoman said:
Looking at the video, of what is supposedly known, the J-16 fighter flying chase, does not look like a J-16 from any angle in the video. Nor does it look like any other known Chinese fighter aircraft. Which leads me to believe that its some kind of CGI or AI generated video superimposed on a video of someone panning a camera around in their back yard.
Click to expand...
The video has been proven to be fake like ever since it came out last year...
 
Yeah clicks will do that (of course I'm a for falling for it myself when I am very anti-misinformation ):<).

Now that I've looked it seems like Wikipedia has now too fallen for the fake video as it is on the Xi'an H-20 page. (Though not surprising with the "anyone can edit" policy.)
 
SK2 said:
6 WS-15 engines, not 4
Click to expand...
No I'm pretty sure someone was asking if it had 6 engines and they replied no it won't have 6 engines. Then another person said B-21 can't go supersonic which is a big drawback. I used deepl to translate it, and that's what it said. The last person then said I wonder if the car culture of the United States will explode after the H20 comes out.. ?? Lol.
 
Nx4eu said:
No I'm pretty sure someone was asking if it had 6 engines and they replied no it won't have 6 engines. Then another person said B-21 can't go supersonic which is a big drawback. I used deepl to translate it, and that's what it said. The last person then said I wonder if the car culture of the United States will explode after the H20 comes out.. ?? Lol.
Click to expand...
That's one of my native language......

Someone asked the original poster did he play "metal 4" before, guess a modern airframe won't fit 6 axial turbojet, another person suggest it may fit 6 WS-15, the rest is similar to what you said
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom