They have been upgrading and creating new variants that I once heard a Chinese commentator said the PLAAF is running out of letters. It's already up to K now.
Best plane in the PLAAF. Its not the design but the ability to carry up to 6 YJ-12s or a mixture of devastating missiles. That's got to be scary for the USN.
They have the JH-7 no need for the SU 34. H-6 can carry double or triple the payloads of JH-7 I think. Drones, cruise missiles and supersonic missiles weapons. Well worth the money. Not expensive to operate and own and build
@@123abcter There are rumors that they are developing the JH-26, which is supposed to be the supersonic, stealthy fighter-bomber to replace the old JHs. But they are just rumors.
@@gelinrefira I don’t know. Do they really need it ? They have the stealthy J20. Have heard about the H-20 bomber. The J20 is still in production and upgrading. J10, J16 and all kinds of cruise and ballistic missiles. They have more variety of modern weapons than anybody in the world. Even more than the USA
60 years old? You know why the US strategic bomber is numbered B-52. A couple of decades ago I saw an interview with a B-52 pilot together with his father who also had been a B-52 pilot. Cute! And his grandfather had also been a B-52 pilot, but he had died from old age. By today his son could be flying it as the fourth generation in the family! Sailships didn't last that long. Were many weapons from the 1870s used during WW2?
North Koreans still fly old fighters. Sometimes they can tweak their older systems to give it some form of upgrade. It may not be good against latest generation of fighters, but they still have a place in warfare. They are still weapons after all, and weapons kill.
@@pakjai5532 Sure, one needs a SAM or a fighter in the air to take down also an old aircraft. I think North Korea would attack with everything they have at once in a war with South Korea. They don't have the stamina for a longer war that Russia has. They maybe have supplies for a number of weeks. Just saturate and overwhelm. Thing is, the B-52 is not a 1884 Maxim machine gun used now in Ukraine against drones, it is one of the legs in the triad of nuclear war deterrance. The US strategic bomber fleet seems to consist of 76 B-52 (32 tons payload each) and 19 B-2 bombers (18 tons). Even if recently upgraded, at some point it is time to make a new design from scratch. B-52 is planned to stay in service until 2040. Maybe a few will make it a full century? The Minuteman III land ICBMs were first put in service 1970. Both of the two latest test launches of UK's since 1990 sub Trident II missiles failed. Newspapers said that the first "veered off course towards America..." and the second never ignited and almost hit the sub as it fell back after ejection. Later US tests have succeeded, though, while the Royal Navy seems to think that they have demonstrated their ability enough... The nuclear triad just doesn't give the impression of being in ship shape.
@@bjorntorlarsson hope you realize that the systems you mentioned aren't 100% foolproof. I wouldn't be so definitive about their stamina; they've shown remarkable courage and determination while facing the U.S.-led NATO and Asian coalition. While the systems you cite are undoubtedly powerful, strategies often play a crucial role in winning wars. They may suffer heavy losses along the way, but at the end of the day, what truly matters is achieving military objectives. As we've seen in the current conflicts in Israel and Ukraine, having the best defense doesn't always ensure safety. Drones have largely replaced the need for helicopters and fighter jets. It's also clear that North Korea won't be fighting alone-Russia and China will definitely step in. They have significant numerical, logistical, and resource advantages, along with surveillance capabilities and nuclear weapons. The situation will be vastly more complex than the conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan. That’s why no one wants to be the first to reignite the Korean War. Having said what I just said, I thank you for your time and inputs. It is always good to hear different opinions and view things from different angles. 🙂
Apocryphal story of an old russian, ex-soviet engineer visiting China after the breakup of the soviet union:"Guys y'all aren't still flying those old tu-16's we sent you back in the 50s are you?" Chinese:"no but actually yes"
@@RectalRooter watch out, you are no longer shielded by pro american propaganda brain washed netizens like you, you are in foreign land. Those people that watch eurasia's videos are not like people who only watch the infographics show dawg, they actually know shit and has a brain.
The current frontline service H-6 are not 60 years old. They were all built after 2006. The new variants are: H-6M (dedicated cruise missile platform, no bombing capability); in service since 2006/2007 but soon replaced by the new H-6K) H-6 K(PLAAF)/J (PLN) (re-designed and modernized conventional bomber/cruise missile carrier); in service since 2009 H-6N (H-6K modified to carry air launched ballistic missiles); in service since 2018 The M variant uses the original H-6 airframe and Chinese engines, but the K/J/N variants use a highly modified H-6 design that incorporates uses the Russian D-30 engines which gives greater payload and range. All the older H-6 offensive variants have been retired or are in the process of being retired. The EW and air refuel variants are still in service (although they are also going to be replaced by newer dedicated tanker/EW platforms.) The K/J/N variants are still in production.
I actually cannot express how genuinely criminaly underated this comment actually is and this world and community actually genuinely needs more people actually like you in this world and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me.
The H-6 and B-52, perfect examples of engineering done right. Two old warbirds, updated and moderized now being flown by crews who weren't even born when they came off the production line and no doubt will be flown by the kids of today's flight crews if not their grandkids as long as their airframes last.
No, not the B52. It’s way too big for today’s standards. And old as old planes. The H-6 are modernized and manufactured as today. Brand new body frames not 60 years old B52
@@123abcter While I would not want to fly a B-52 on a ground strike support mission as they were used during the Vietnam Arch Light mission, nor as a traditional strategic bomber hitting cities with conventional bombs from on high, they are still a good platform to launch stand off missiles from a "safe" distance and away from enemy air defences, much the same as the H-6 does. Yes they are long in the tooth, but the airframes that are still serviceable and flight worthy can be, have been and currently are being upgraded in terms of avionics, commumciations, self-defence, navigation, and engines. Apart from the airframe of those B-52's still in service, I doubt much of whats inside is original kit it had when manufactured. The basic design of the B-52 is still good and it could still be in production like the H-6 if the yanks so wished.
@@UNSPACY-zb2gn hmmmmmm.....maybe, but the Bear is a Turbo prop and not a pure jet like either H-6 or B-52.....but yeah, an old design that is still in service 70 years after its introduction.
@@gumpyoldbugger6944 The B-52 is just old and dangerous to fly. I think there are around 40 still airworthy. They don’t replace the air frame main components if you do you may as well build a brand new one. Because it will cost double the price. They are scavenging or cannibalize ( I think this is the word they use) From other B-52 for parts. The B-52 engines (8 of them) are not very efficient, a trail of smoke can be seen. No, I don’t think B-52 will be built again. The H-6 carrying electronic pods under the wings can serve as AWAC and electronic jamming machines. It’s bigger than the heavy fighter/bomber. Like the SU 35, J16, F15 or the JH 7. Longer range. But the cost of operating the H-6 maybe comparable to the J16. This is the reason it will be around when the B-52 will be gone from the service.
h6 is huge even it is only about 3/2 size of b52. I saw it with my own eyes flying over my head close to my home in Shanghai 20 years ago. It was ready to land at the time. It was a stunning moment that I can't forget. First time I realized that Chinese can build such a big aircraft.
its always surprised me how big the craft actaully is when parking next to support equipments, the design looks like an elongaded f4 phantom but its bomber size.
About 20 years ago, the Chinese Air Force had a discussion about the need for a new "low-cost" bomber. The conclusion was that it did not need a weapons load of more than 20 tons, did not need stealth, and had a range of 9,000 km. The proposed solution seemed to be an enlarged JH-7 bomber with a parallel two-seat layout and an internal bomb bay. Well, no doubt, it would be better to directly upgrade the original H-6 series...
In this day and time - and going forward - "stealth" is overrated. radars and satellites are getting more and more sophisticated. stealth is too expensive of a design to focus on. Sensors and performance are more important I think
The Tupolev design pedigree is evident, however the current H6 is so much more than that old warhorse. I sometimes wonder if China might develop an equivalent to the Tu-160, however China appears more interested in their extended range missile systems, which may be a better investment from an essentially defensive rather than offensive military posture
@@恶魔巫师-y4f An excellent example of the "If it is not broken, don't fix it" mentality. The H6's are obviously upgradeable, and having essentially lots of the same airframe (in a general sense) means parts logistics is very much simplified.
No other country can upgrade old bomber like the H6, because the unique design of this plane is one of a kind. a large wing span with subsonic handling and large payload that is build as fuselage engine. Compare with typical design of bomber aircraft, older model with propeller, B52 with wing mount engine, Lancer and Tu150 with complex variable geometry. All of theme are stuck with passive toss bomb. None of these can install wing mount radar active system, the H6 can load large missile under wing like scaled up fighter jet. This allow many coast defense missile to be brought further into the sea and directly launched from air, multiply their range and threaten critical infrastructures of many US base. The H6 can launch attack from with in the air force projection or surface air defense, while fly at low altitude, these condition make it a great risk to intercept. The H6 is also a mass produced cheap to build plane that has very high operational readiness, this means effective saturation attack as standard practice. Now you can understand why advanced fighter like J20 is a great threat, and with J35 even more so. These potent air superiority fighter will enable platform like H6 to operate more aggressively. This is what they mean by 'force multiplier'.
I actually cannot express how genuinely criminaly underated this comment actually is and this world actually genuinely needs more people actually like you in this world and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me.
@@RADICALFLOAT_95 The reason is that simple. To launch ground missile from air, all the motor power is in the range and speed. Without lift from gravity, these weapon become something else.
H6 is a unique design made perfect for adopting modern technology, jet power with sleek profile(body engine), and excellent low speed handling, simplicity in construction. The TU15 developed in the cold war was indeed a forward thinking design, further more this bomber has a very blend contour that is similar to civilian flight when viewed from distance.
It was reasonable for China to choose to introduce the tu-16 at that time, because in the 1960s China first needed a nuclear bomb carrier, and the h-5 (IL-28) could not meet the requirements. (Choose one from tu95/tu16/tu22☝🏻🤓), tu-16 is faster than tu95, has a longer range than tu-22, and can cover the South China Sea and the first island chain in the Western Pacific (and can also defend against Soviet armored clusters in the north😂). The reasons why a new bomber was not developed afterwards: 1. Due to the change in relations with the Soviet Union and technological blockade 2. Economic development and military expenditure control, limited funds and research were invested more in fighters and missiles → As a result, advanced avionics equipment and advanced anti-ship/cruise missiles were used for H-6 upgrades 3. By 2024, the main target mission area of China's bombers will still be the South China Sea and the first island chain in the Western Pacific (until China has enough aircraft carrier battle groups😳) 4. With limited funds and technology, China has always been pragmatic 5. Changes in the role of bombers? The possibility of large unmanned bombers? The large bomber that is truly suitable for the 21st century has not yet been determined.
one of my friend was mechanic in Indonesian Air Force, he was told by (now retired) senior mechanic that once decomisioned Tu-16 "The aircraft fuselage was hard, The Iron Saw they used become dull and useless" - as apparently it made with Titanium frame. so the Mechanics use tracktor and wrecking ball to crush it into manageable pieces afaik the legend said the wreck of aircraft end up melted down into Spoon, Fork, Utensill and Pans Thats prob why it still in services, as the airframe itself was longlasting, and tough
Yes I agree. B-52 is simply just being big that’s all. With 8 engines and big wings. They stop making B-52 over 60 years ago. Very dangerous to fly them. The H-6 are still being made as today with upgraded engines and avionics. H-6 and B-52 are basically trucks in the sky. H-6 will live on a lot longer than the B-52. It might out live the B2
China has modernized the H6 with advanced radar and avionics. This bomber can also carry many missiles including missiles with nuclear warheads. And don't forget China operates hundreds of these bombers so it's still quite scary.
Not the aircrafts themselves but the missiles they carry. B52 and Tu95 have been stop production for decades. Some H6 are new with updated engines and updated electronic systems.
The H-6 has legs too short for a deterrence role. In fact, some months ago, several had to leapfrog to a far eastern Russian base prior to joining Russia on a joint mission off the coast of Alaska sue to the H-6’s range limitations. The B-52 on the other hand has a service life which speaks for itself.
Chinese design doctrine: as long as it works perfectly, how it looks doesn't matter. American design doctrine: it doesn't matter if it works, as long as it looks banging....then we'll lie that it works. Russian design doctrine: however it ends up looking, it must work perfectly...and also it must be sexy. Super sexy.
China has continued the upgrading in many arenas , including military forces , green energy , the improvement of the livelihood of its 56 ethnic groups , the minimization of the desert areas , the improvement of ecosystem , etc.
USA : B-52 Stratofortress Russia : Tu-95 Bear China : ( disapprovingly looking at any post 1980s bomber design) sorry, but true Great power must have an old,reliable, but also upgraded bomber design. So, H-6 it is !
I always thought the H-6K is like an old but revitalized/revamped B-52G/H strategic bomber split into two smaller but more-survivable pairs... provided H-6J/Ks are operated as pairs/multiple-pairs.
As for missile trucks, it's interesting how nobody seems interested in producing a carrier capable one. Think if the US Navy made one based on the E-2/C-2 platform, or Russia based on the Yak-44, or China based on the KJ-600. Long range, fuel efficient (needing less fuel replenishment shipment from oilers) long loiter time, less need for advanced expensive training of an elite pilot, and able to carry LOTS of not only missiles to overwhelm threats with but also LOTS of decoys, chaff, and flares for defensive needs
In fact imagine a carrier carrying nothing but planes of such a family /platform. Air-to-air missile trucks for CAP, escorted by AEW, electronic warfare / jammer variants, and refueling tankers. Maritime patrol, anti-sub and anti-surface warfare variants. Bombers carrying ground-attack missiles, or even free-fall dumb bombs to drop on land targets. Electronic surveillance versions. Transports carrying paratroops, airdrop supplies etc. Huge logistics and training savings
Then you've got AC-130 style gunships, other close air support craft with armor and guns, missile defense Gatling gun carriers, propaganda broadcasters, the list goes on and on.
The H-6 make sense and still being upgraded because they are relatively inexpensive to build and operate jet bombers. Bigger than the F15 USA would have used as bombers, similar ones would be J-16 and JH-7. JH-7 is less capable as fighter but still can go supersonic speed and half the price of J-16. The H-6 is much bigger than all these and can flying much longer distance. With medium to long range guided missiles these H-6 are safe to operate in battle fields
AC-130 is for cargo. Wide body compares to H-6. And is not jet powered this means slower speed. Helicopter gunship is designed much better than the C-130 as gunship. Helicopter can land almost everywhere and can fly low to avoid radar detection.
@@123abcter No, the C-130 is for cargo; C is for cargo. The AC-130 is a ground attack airplane; A is for attack. Yes, it's a modified C-130; hence the C remains in the name as well. Yes, propellers are slower; that's the price you pay for lower fuel consumption, lower cost, easier takeoffs and landings, longer loiter time on station, cheaper training of pilots and mechanics (who don't have to also learn jets), etc.
The H-6 does not need to fly long ranges well away from China to be effective, since it's more a strike platform to defend against enemy shipping than anything else. That's why the plane has been heavily modified and upgraded to carry the latest Chinese air to ground missiles.
also, i dont think H6 family will be directly replaced by H20, H6 though upgraded to newest standard and do not inexpensive at all this time, still more flexible in statics and less nuclear sensitive than those large 4 engine bomber, even much better than the glory Soviet TU22M H6 requires less support and can take off from a 1500m runway airport, and do not have the complex variable sweep wing which requires special support, and for survivablility, today all none strealth bombers can be easily intercepted so the main usage of non-stealth bomber is a missile truck in the sky, at this point though tu22m are much better than H6 the difference in real war can be small, and H6 take advantage of large payload like anti ship blastic missile H6 is a handy tool proven by the time, the original tu16 is a mastet piece of Tupolev, and the continuous upgrading make H6 a modern plane
Actually glass cockpit mean very different things in aviation. Glass cockpit refers to using panel displays to display the various parameters, replacing the old dials on older planes.
They should relocate the wheels for H6N so it can accomodate 2 more missiles, and the underbelly can carry two more. Newer variants should no longer use the old D-30 engine, should be the WS-20 version
It's a small bomber at best. Surprised China hasn't developed something more modern. That said, they just recently made their first indigenously produced commercial large aircraft with the Comac C919 so it might take some time. Perhaps Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group could upscale the J-20 into a large stealth bomber?
A standoff air launch platform for ultra-long-range giant missiles. The missile is too big. It is said that both the United States and Russia are carrying out such modifications. It is irreplaceable.
In 1980s, there was a larger bomber project calld H-8, it almost large as Tu-95/B-52. The plane looks like a larger H-6 but with 4 or 6 wing mounted turbofan engines. However, due to the shortage of funds, the project was abandoned. Enterd the 21st century, the new H-6K series had a massive production, and the brand new H-20 is developing, so the airforce think they don't need a new sub-sonic large bomber like B-52, those H-6s are enough.
Saying this junk could fly to hawaii is like saying an amateur can get a football into the net if there are no goal keepers. Cant even compare it to B52..more like B1 fortress
China's Enemies Still Fear This 60 Year Old Bomber? Who are you talking about? China never bombed anyone, ever. China couldn't even drop a single bomb on Tokyo during war with Japan.
@@andersonarmstrong2650 Who let the little dogs out? Who, who, who, who, who? !!!! DON'T TOUCH HER !!!!! Who let the little dogs out? Who, who, who, who, who?
مقر بريكس اسيا هو الصين شنغهاي ومقر اوروبا هو بروكسل او جنيف وانشاء تحالف شامل لغاية عشرين ثلاثين يحاكي مواجهة تحالف اميريكي ترامب روسي بوتين خليجي بن سلمان وهناك ملفات ايران واوكرانيا وتايوان واسرائيل واسواق النفط والتعدين والعملات النقدية العالمية وبورصات اليورو واليوان والين والدولار والروبل والروبية🌐🇺🇳🇪🇺🇨🇳Euorasia ملفات دولية (🇺🇦🇮🇷🇮🇱🇰🇵🇹🇼) وصفقات التوقيع لاتبادل التجاري بين بروكسل وشنغهاي ممكن ان تصل لترليون يورو او ترليون يوان
if the H8 project did not stoped at that time, today we can see real 4 engine large naval bombers, that will be the true legend maybe one day the under going H20 will have its naval variant, at this time the naval strike planes has been phased out for years, when talk about naval strike plane, the first thing come to my mind is A7D, the second is JH7, the third is tornado ADS but what if a 4 engine 300 ton naval bomber?
Unlike Russia and the US, China never has a supersonic strategic bomber, just the H-6. Perhaps it never needs a supersonic one. The H-20 is said to be another subsonic aircraft but with stealth.
@@恶魔巫师-y4f The Ukrainian SMO has shown that attrition of weapons and manpower is critical factor in modern warfare due to pervasive ISR from satellites to drones and the precision weapons system used. China is well placed as undisputed industrial manufacturing master to fight modern attrition war. Hope it never happens but China will surely prevail if provoked into it.
@@RADICALFLOAT_95 Who let the little dogs out? Who, who, who, who, who? !!!! DON'T TOUCH HER !!!!! Who let the little dogs out? Who, who, who, who, who?
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
It is in 60years old shape, but its avionic, weapons, engines, radars are all up to date technology.
Both the US and Russia have bombers as old as well.
the engines are out of a Tu154m airliner of the early 70s. Modern they are not. Better than the 1st gen - 100%.
B52, Lancer and even Bear all updated to modern tech, but the most important thing is the architecture. No other platform can be used like the H6
@@Azathoth2980b 52 is not called Lancer. It's called Stratofortress. I think you are getting mixed up with B1B Lancer
@@srijanme sorry I did not explicit, I assumed its widely know these refer to different plane. Added comma would help.
They have been upgrading and creating new variants that I once heard a Chinese commentator said the PLAAF is running out of letters. It's already up to K now.
They could always use more letters, e.g H6AA, H6AB, etc.
@zhengguo3178 then it becomes an excel spreadsheet 😂
Up to N now
H6N
Supposedly the H-20 outright replaces the H-6 series eventually. At least according to some timeline posted on SD.
I'd think only the design is old, everything else is new
Even the radar is the latest
The controls are fly by wires I think
@@123abcterl actually agree with you
@@TrumpNo.1l actually agree with you.
It has a similar role to tu22M in the Russian Air Force today, which makes sense being based on the tu16
Best plane in the PLAAF. Its not the design but the ability to carry up to 6 YJ-12s or a mixture of devastating missiles. That's got to be scary for the USN.
This plane is why they don't have su-34 because they don't need su-34 if they have this it has longer range
They have the JH-7 no need for the SU 34. H-6 can carry double or triple the payloads of JH-7 I think. Drones, cruise missiles and supersonic missiles weapons. Well worth the money. Not expensive to operate and own and build
@@123abcterl actually agree with.
@@123abcter There are rumors that they are developing the JH-26, which is supposed to be the supersonic, stealthy fighter-bomber to replace the old JHs. But they are just rumors.
@@gelinrefira I don’t know. Do they really need it ? They have the stealthy J20. Have heard about the H-20 bomber. The J20 is still in production and upgrading. J10, J16 and all kinds of cruise and ballistic missiles. They have more variety of modern weapons than anybody in the world. Even more than the USA
60 years old? You know why the US strategic bomber is numbered B-52. A couple of decades ago I saw an interview with a B-52 pilot together with his father who also had been a B-52 pilot. Cute! And his grandfather had also been a B-52 pilot, but he had died from old age. By today his son could be flying it as the fourth generation in the family! Sailships didn't last that long.
Were many weapons from the 1870s used during WW2?
Mosin Nagant was a 19th century rifle in red army in ww2. It is still used today
North Koreans still fly old fighters. Sometimes they can tweak their older systems to give it some form of upgrade. It may not be good against latest generation of fighters, but they still have a place in warfare. They are still weapons after all, and weapons kill.
2024 and we're still using gun powder.
This is a nothing burger thread.
@@pakjai5532 Sure, one needs a SAM or a fighter in the air to take down also an old aircraft. I think North Korea would attack with everything they have at once in a war with South Korea. They don't have the stamina for a longer war that Russia has. They maybe have supplies for a number of weeks. Just saturate and overwhelm.
Thing is, the B-52 is not a 1884 Maxim machine gun used now in Ukraine against drones, it is one of the legs in the triad of nuclear war deterrance. The US strategic bomber fleet seems to consist of 76 B-52 (32 tons payload each) and 19 B-2 bombers (18 tons). Even if recently upgraded, at some point it is time to make a new design from scratch. B-52 is planned to stay in service until 2040. Maybe a few will make it a full century?
The Minuteman III land ICBMs were first put in service 1970. Both of the two latest test launches of UK's since 1990 sub Trident II missiles failed. Newspapers said that the first "veered off course towards America..." and the second never ignited and almost hit the sub as it fell back after ejection. Later US tests have succeeded, though, while the Royal Navy seems to think that they have demonstrated their ability enough... The nuclear triad just doesn't give the impression of being in ship shape.
@@bjorntorlarsson hope you realize that the systems you mentioned aren't 100% foolproof. I wouldn't be so definitive about their stamina; they've shown remarkable courage and determination while facing the U.S.-led NATO and Asian coalition. While the systems you cite are undoubtedly powerful, strategies often play a crucial role in winning wars. They may suffer heavy losses along the way, but at the end of the day, what truly matters is achieving military objectives.
As we've seen in the current conflicts in Israel and Ukraine, having the best defense doesn't always ensure safety. Drones have largely replaced the need for helicopters and fighter jets. It's also clear that North Korea won't be fighting alone-Russia and China will definitely step in. They have significant numerical, logistical, and resource advantages, along with surveillance capabilities and nuclear weapons. The situation will be vastly more complex than the conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan. That’s why no one wants to be the first to reignite the Korean War. Having said what I just said, I thank you for your time and inputs. It is always good to hear different opinions and view things from different angles. 🙂
Apocryphal story of an old russian, ex-soviet engineer visiting China after the breakup of the soviet union:"Guys y'all aren't still flying those old tu-16's we sent you back in the 50s are you?"
Chinese:"no but actually yes"
It looks so cool! Something out of the amazing aviation designs of the 60s!
It is what H-6 can carry they fear.
Hypersonic missile like YJ-12 and DF-17
@@superpooper_2030can the H-6 carrying DF -17 ? I know the YJ 21 is and just as deadly
ccp uses only the best chinesium in the world
@@RectalRootergo watch cocomelon kid.
@@RectalRooter watch out, you are no longer shielded by pro american propaganda brain washed netizens like you, you are in foreign land. Those people that watch eurasia's videos are not like people who only watch the infographics show dawg, they actually know shit and has a brain.
The current frontline service H-6 are not 60 years old. They were all built after 2006. The new variants are:
H-6M (dedicated cruise missile platform, no bombing capability); in service since 2006/2007 but soon replaced by the new H-6K)
H-6 K(PLAAF)/J (PLN) (re-designed and modernized conventional bomber/cruise missile carrier); in service since 2009
H-6N (H-6K modified to carry air launched ballistic missiles); in service since 2018
The M variant uses the original H-6 airframe and Chinese engines, but the K/J/N variants use a highly modified H-6 design that incorporates uses the Russian D-30 engines which gives greater payload and range.
All the older H-6 offensive variants have been retired or are in the process of being retired. The EW and air refuel variants are still in service (although they are also going to be replaced by newer dedicated tanker/EW platforms.)
The K/J/N variants are still in production.
I actually cannot express how genuinely criminaly underated this comment actually is and this world and community actually genuinely needs more people actually like you in this world and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me.
即便未来轰20公布中国也需要服役几百架魔改轰6轰炸机，在战争当中高端武器首波冲突就会使用完，能够大量生产廉价的武器系统才是获胜的关键，所以轰20服役也不能顶替轰6的作用，200架魔改轰6可以携带远程武器威慑第二岛链包括东南亚印度洋中东大部分地区
冇錯説得對。因為現在有空投超音速和高度準確導彈。不需要大量攜帶炸彈機艙所以不需要大型機體。更不需要太接近敵方投放炸彈。所以H-6 還是很有效轟炸機
轰20是烟雾弹
The H-6 and B-52, perfect examples of engineering done right. Two old warbirds, updated and moderized now being flown by crews who weren't even born when they came off the production line and no doubt will be flown by the kids of today's flight crews if not their grandkids as long as their airframes last.
No, not the B52. It’s way too big for today’s standards. And old as old planes. The H-6 are modernized and manufactured as today. Brand new body frames not 60 years old B52
@@123abcter While I would not want to fly a B-52 on a ground strike support mission as they were used during the Vietnam Arch Light mission, nor as a traditional strategic bomber hitting cities with conventional bombs from on high, they are still a good platform to launch stand off missiles from a "safe" distance and away from enemy air defences, much the same as the H-6 does.
Yes they are long in the tooth, but the airframes that are still serviceable and flight worthy can be, have been and currently are being upgraded in terms of avionics, commumciations, self-defence, navigation, and engines.
Apart from the airframe of those B-52's still in service, I doubt much of whats inside is original kit it had when manufactured.
The basic design of the B-52 is still good and it could still be in production like the H-6 if the yanks so wished.
Don’t forget the Tu-95😂
@@UNSPACY-zb2gn hmmmmmm.....maybe, but the Bear is a Turbo prop and not a pure jet like either H-6 or B-52.....but yeah, an old design that is still in service 70 years after its introduction.
@@gumpyoldbugger6944 The B-52 is just old and dangerous to fly. I think there are around 40 still airworthy. They don’t replace the air frame main components if you do you may as well build a brand new one. Because it will cost double the price. They are scavenging or cannibalize ( I think this is the word they use) From other B-52 for parts. The B-52 engines (8 of them) are not very efficient, a trail of smoke can be seen. No, I don’t think B-52 will be built again. The H-6 carrying electronic pods under the wings can serve as AWAC and electronic jamming machines. It’s bigger than the heavy fighter/bomber. Like the SU 35, J16, F15 or the JH 7. Longer range. But the cost of operating the H-6 maybe comparable to the J16. This is the reason it will be around when the B-52 will be gone from the service.
The H6 is the iron fist of the Chinese military.
h6 is huge even it is only about 3/2 size of b52. I saw it with my own eyes flying over my head close to my home in Shanghai 20 years ago. It was ready to land at the time. It was a stunning moment that I can't forget. First time I realized that Chinese can build such a big aircraft.
its always surprised me how big the craft actaully is when parking next to support equipments, the design looks like an elongaded f4 phantom but its bomber size.
About 20 years ago, the Chinese Air Force had a discussion about the need for a new "low-cost" bomber. The conclusion was that it did not need a weapons load of more than 20 tons, did not need stealth, and had a range of 9,000 km. The proposed solution seemed to be an enlarged JH-7 bomber with a parallel two-seat layout and an internal bomb bay. Well, no doubt, it would be better to directly upgrade the original H-6 series...
In this day and time - and going forward - "stealth" is overrated. radars and satellites are getting more and more sophisticated. stealth is too expensive of a design to focus on. Sensors and performance are more important I think
Then why is China USA and Russia all building stealth fighters and bombers? Reality doesn't match your assumptions
pointing finger at you and laughing my ass off
@@Amidatl actually agree with.
@@RectalRootergo watch cocomelon kid.
the SAR mission makes sence, as the H-6 could cover long distances faster, locate distressed personnel, & drop rescue gear.
The Chinese Navy H-6K is parked at the airport(CZX) not far from my workplace.
The Tupolev design pedigree is evident, however the current H6 is so much more than that old warhorse. I sometimes wonder if China might develop an equivalent to the Tu-160, however China appears more interested in their extended range missile systems, which may be a better investment from an essentially defensive rather than offensive military posture
中国的军费开支很少，所以不会去追求发展大量轰20代替轰6，即便未来轰20公开服役，中国也不会退役停止生产轰6
@@恶魔巫师-y4f An excellent example of the "If it is not broken, don't fix it" mentality. The H6's are obviously upgradeable, and having essentially lots of the same airframe (in a general sense) means parts logistics is very much simplified.
@@phils4634嗯，中国政府军事专家认为轰6可以携带远程超高音速导弹威慑西太平洋东南亚澳大利亚印度洋大部分地区，所以保持大量轰6存在是有必要的，除非未来有更廉价更实用的轰炸机代替200架轰6中国才会考虑停止生产轰6
@@phils4634因为如果轰20开发出来，一架轰20造价需要几十亿美元，制造几十架轰20也没有太大的意义，因为轰6的航程足够中国威慑亚洲西太平洋东南亚澳大利亚第二岛链大部分地区，而轰20如果大量生产制造，轰20突破美国防空轰炸美国本土似乎也不太现实，生产太多轰20需要大量军费维护，还不如保留开发轰20的技术生产几十架轰20，然后将更多的军队投资洲际弹道导弹，因为洲际弹道导弹打击美国比轰炸机更有效，就像美国也不可能通过b21突破中国的防空系统对中国发射核弹
@@phils4634中国需要考虑的对手只有美国，而轰6足够威慑第二岛链所有美军资产，将更多的军费投资到洲际弹道导弹开发更有意义，据我所知中国已经在开发东风45以及东风5c者两种新型洲际弹道导弹，东风45类似于和平卫士，东风5c类似萨尔马特，总之，中国现在首要发展的就是战略核力量，虽然中国核投送方式不够多，但是陆基发射井以及世界最庞大的TEL洲际弹道导弹发射旅足够了，可能在2030年中国的战略核力量就会超过美国
1:38 Yes Soloviev D-30K
The same engine that powered TD variant of Ilyushin Il-76, Il-62 and Tupolev Tu-154M.
I love the sound of the engine.
its a classic with the whine :)
@mrrolandlawrence Same.
I grew up during that time as well.
Well, sadly when they mostly gone but i have opportunity to heard few of them on airport.
No other country can upgrade old bomber like the H6, because the unique design of this plane is one of a kind. a large wing span with subsonic handling and large payload that is build as fuselage engine. Compare with typical design of bomber aircraft, older model with propeller, B52 with wing mount engine, Lancer and Tu150 with complex variable geometry. All of theme are stuck with passive toss bomb. None of these can install wing mount radar active system, the H6 can load large missile under wing like scaled up fighter jet. This allow many coast defense missile to be brought further into the sea and directly launched from air, multiply their range and threaten critical infrastructures of many US base. The H6 can launch attack from with in the air force projection or surface air defense, while fly at low altitude, these condition make it a great risk to intercept. The H6 is also a mass produced cheap to build plane that has very high operational readiness, this means effective saturation attack as standard practice. Now you can understand why advanced fighter like J20 is a great threat, and with J35 even more so. These potent air superiority fighter will enable platform like H6 to operate more aggressively. This is what they mean by 'force multiplier'.
I actually cannot express how genuinely criminaly underated this comment actually is and this world actually genuinely needs more people actually like you in this world and you actually couldn't have said that actually any better than me.
@@RADICALFLOAT_95 The reason is that simple. To launch ground missile from air, all the motor power is in the range and speed. Without lift from gravity, these weapon become something else.
H6 is a unique design made perfect for adopting modern technology, jet power with sleek profile(body engine), and excellent low speed handling, simplicity in construction. The TU15 developed in the cold war was indeed a forward thinking design, further more this bomber has a very blend contour that is similar to civilian flight when viewed from distance.
haha pointing finger at you
If they conduct SAR missions it would explain why they kept some with a glass nose for the visibility.
Still younger than a B52.
It was reasonable for China to choose to introduce the tu-16 at that time, because in the 1960s China first needed a nuclear bomb carrier, and the h-5 (IL-28) could not meet the requirements. (Choose one from tu95/tu16/tu22☝🏻🤓), tu-16 is faster than tu95, has a longer range than tu-22, and can cover the South China Sea and the first island chain in the Western Pacific (and can also defend against Soviet armored clusters in the north😂).
The reasons why a new bomber was not developed afterwards:
1. Due to the change in relations with the Soviet Union and technological blockade
2. Economic development and military expenditure control, limited funds and research were invested more in fighters and missiles → As a result, advanced avionics equipment and advanced anti-ship/cruise missiles were used for H-6 upgrades
3. By 2024, the main target mission area of China's bombers will still be the South China Sea and the first island chain in the Western Pacific (until China has enough aircraft carrier battle groups😳)
4. With limited funds and technology, China has always been pragmatic
5. Changes in the role of bombers? The possibility of large unmanned bombers? The large bomber that is truly suitable for the 21st century has not yet been determined.
ccp says.... If it is not copied -- We can't build it
The difference in bomber generation is not that big, after all, the radars are all new
The ole flying tube is still a reliable design.
one of my friend was mechanic in Indonesian Air Force, he was told by (now retired) senior mechanic that once decomisioned Tu-16
"The aircraft fuselage was hard, The Iron Saw they used become dull and useless" - as apparently it made with Titanium frame. so the Mechanics use tracktor and wrecking ball to crush it into manageable pieces
afaik the legend said the wreck of aircraft end up melted down into Spoon, Fork, Utensill and Pans
Thats prob why it still in services, as the airframe itself was longlasting, and tough
I thought only Iraq bought 4 H6 from China?
@@zldao H6 is License built version Tu16. and Indonesia used to have 12 Tu16B and 2 Tu16R
She good no need to change what is not broken anyway.
Pointing finger at you and laughing
The H-6 looks nicer than the B-52. Cool-looking aircraft.
No
nah bruh
Yes I agree. B-52 is simply just being big that’s all. With 8 engines and big wings. They stop making B-52 over 60 years ago. Very dangerous to fly them. The H-6 are still being made as today with upgraded engines and avionics. H-6 and B-52 are basically trucks in the sky. H-6 will live on a lot longer than the B-52. It might out live the B2
China has modernized the H6 with advanced radar and avionics. This bomber can also carry many missiles including missiles with nuclear warheads. And don't forget China operates hundreds of these bombers so it's still quite scary.
大国战争本来比较的就是方便大规模生产的武器，轰6的作用足够威慑西太平洋印度洋东南亚澳大利亚的美军资产，而且轰6拥有几百架，这是强大的远程打击火力。美国的轰炸机b2确实比轰6先进，但是美国想通过轰炸机轰炸中国同样需要取得制空权才有可能做到，轰6就是实战利器，当然中国同样会开发轰20，因为中国所有军事科技都会发展保留军事技术积累
Unrelated. Chinese twin carrier battle group photo just got release
Not the aircrafts themselves but the missiles they carry. B52 and Tu95 have been stop production for decades. Some H6 are new with updated engines and updated electronic systems.
In the era of drones, the role of bombers is not that important
The H-6 has legs too short for a deterrence role. In fact, some months ago, several had to leapfrog to a far eastern Russian base prior to joining Russia on a joint mission off the coast of Alaska sue to the H-6’s range limitations.
The B-52 on the other hand has a service life which speaks for itself.
Chinese design doctrine: as long as it works perfectly, how it looks doesn't matter.
American design doctrine: it doesn't matter if it works, as long as it looks banging....then we'll lie that it works.
Russian design doctrine: however it ends up looking, it must work perfectly...and also it must be sexy. Super sexy.
hahaha pointing finger at you
The glass nose makes sense for S&R, less so for navigation over the ocean. I wonder if this is something they keep a few old ones for.
China has continued the upgrading in many arenas , including military forces , green energy , the improvement of the livelihood of its 56 ethnic groups , the minimization of the desert areas , the improvement of ecosystem , etc.
That's why the legendary H-20 still not come out
What do you mean the h20 is not real ? I have seen many cgi graphic renderings and advisements showing it under a giant sheet of fabric.
USA : B-52 Stratofortress
Russia : Tu-95 Bear
China : ( disapprovingly looking at any post 1980s bomber design) sorry, but true Great power must have an old,reliable, but also upgraded bomber design. So, H-6 it is !
What are you talking aboot ??
ccp uses the best chinesium in the world
@EurasiaNaval That's an old Russian Tupolev right? Btw, what happened to Russia and China's Ka52-k deal for Chinese navy?
I always thought the H-6K is like an old but revitalized/revamped B-52G/H strategic bomber split into two smaller but more-survivable pairs... provided H-6J/Ks are operated as pairs/multiple-pairs.
As for missile trucks, it's interesting how nobody seems interested in producing a carrier capable one. Think if the US Navy made one based on the E-2/C-2 platform, or Russia based on the Yak-44, or China based on the KJ-600. Long range, fuel efficient (needing less fuel replenishment shipment from oilers) long loiter time, less need for advanced expensive training of an elite pilot, and able to carry LOTS of not only missiles to overwhelm threats with but also LOTS of decoys, chaff, and flares for defensive needs
In fact imagine a carrier carrying nothing but planes of such a family /platform. Air-to-air missile trucks for CAP, escorted by AEW, electronic warfare / jammer variants, and refueling tankers. Maritime patrol, anti-sub and anti-surface warfare variants. Bombers carrying ground-attack missiles, or even free-fall dumb bombs to drop on land targets. Electronic surveillance versions. Transports carrying paratroops, airdrop supplies etc. Huge logistics and training savings
Then you've got AC-130 style gunships, other close air support craft with armor and guns, missile defense Gatling gun carriers, propaganda broadcasters, the list goes on and on.
The H-6 make sense and still being upgraded because they are relatively inexpensive to build and operate jet bombers. Bigger than the F15 USA would have used as bombers, similar ones would be J-16 and JH-7. JH-7 is less capable as fighter but still can go supersonic speed and half the price of J-16. The H-6 is much bigger than all these and can flying much longer distance. With medium to long range guided missiles these H-6 are safe to operate in battle fields
AC-130 is for cargo. Wide body compares to H-6. And is not jet powered this means slower speed. Helicopter gunship is designed much better than the C-130 as gunship. Helicopter can land almost everywhere and can fly low to avoid radar detection.
@@123abcter No, the C-130 is for cargo; C is for cargo. The AC-130 is a ground attack airplane; A is for attack. Yes, it's a modified C-130; hence the C remains in the name as well. Yes, propellers are slower; that's the price you pay for lower fuel consumption, lower cost, easier takeoffs and landings, longer loiter time on station, cheaper training of pilots and mechanics (who don't have to also learn jets), etc.
China....Like Russia...Always upgrading...Always going forward and advancing...With tried and true technology and still relevant even today. Peace
hahaha falling over -- pointing finger at you
The H-6 does not need to fly long ranges well away from China to be effective, since it's more a strike platform to defend against enemy shipping than anything else. That's why the plane has been heavily modified and upgraded to carry the latest Chinese air to ground missiles.
战时中国周边的美军基地会受到中国大量中程弹道导弹打击机场被瘫痪无法起飞太多的战斗机，这时候轰6通过中国大量战斗机掩护可以随便对美军基地进行轰炸
Isn't it 70 years? Production of Tu-16 started in 1953. Even H-6 had a maiden flight in 1959.
also, i dont think H6 family will be directly replaced by H20, H6 though upgraded to newest standard and do not inexpensive at all this time, still more flexible in statics and less nuclear sensitive than those large 4 engine bomber, even much better than the glory Soviet TU22M
H6 requires less support and can take off from a 1500m runway airport, and do not have the complex variable sweep wing which requires special support, and for survivablility, today all none strealth bombers can be easily intercepted so the main usage of non-stealth bomber is a missile truck in the sky, at this point though tu22m are much better than H6 the difference in real war can be small, and H6 take advantage of large payload like anti ship blastic missile
H6 is a handy tool proven by the time, the original tu16 is a mastet piece of Tupolev, and the continuous upgrading make H6 a modern plane
Actually glass cockpit mean very different things in aviation. Glass cockpit refers to using panel displays to display the various parameters, replacing the old dials on older planes.
Stop talking about stuff you know and understand. It is against youtube comment polies
They should relocate the wheels for H6N so it can accomodate 2 more missiles, and the underbelly can carry two more. Newer variants should no longer use the old D-30 engine, should be the WS-20 version
It's a small bomber at best. Surprised China hasn't developed something more modern. That said, they just recently made their first indigenously produced commercial large aircraft with the Comac C919 so it might take some time. Perhaps Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group could upscale the J-20 into a large stealth bomber?
old shell filled with modern parts
The AK-47 is also a pretty old design.
A standoff air launch platform for ultra-long-range giant missiles. The missile is too big. It is said that both the United States and Russia are carrying out such modifications. It is irreplaceable.
Always thought it odd that China never made an attempt at an equivalent of the Tu-95 / B-52, nor the Tu-160/B-1.
因为直接开发轰20了，200架轰6魔改也足够中国在西太平洋印度洋东南亚使用了
In 1980s, there was a larger bomber project calld H-8, it almost large as Tu-95/B-52. The plane looks like a larger H-6 but with 4 or 6 wing mounted turbofan engines. However, due to the shortage of funds, the project was abandoned.
Enterd the 21st century, the new H-6K series had a massive production, and the brand new H-20 is developing, so the airforce think they don't need a new sub-sonic large bomber like B-52, those H-6s are enough.
Because these enemies have all been living fat, and complacent. Despite having better weapons and more resources, their minds are weak.
Do video jh-xx bomber it is Chinese version of NGAD but probably mainly a high altitude bomber.
Saying this junk could fly to hawaii is like saying an amateur can get a football into the net if there are no goal keepers. Cant even compare it to B52..more like B1 fortress
China's Enemies Still Fear This 60 Year Old Bomber? Who are you talking about?
China never bombed anyone, ever. China couldn't even drop a single bomb on Tokyo during war with Japan.
Eh "China never bombed anyone" that is a good thing right?🤔
You're here because China is the number one economic power in the world, and number two military after Russia.
@@andersonarmstrong2650 Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
!!!! DON'T TOUCH HER !!!!!
Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
مقر بريكس اسيا هو الصين شنغهاي ومقر اوروبا هو بروكسل او جنيف وانشاء تحالف شامل لغاية عشرين ثلاثين يحاكي مواجهة تحالف اميريكي ترامب روسي بوتين خليجي بن سلمان وهناك ملفات ايران واوكرانيا وتايوان واسرائيل واسواق النفط والتعدين والعملات النقدية العالمية وبورصات اليورو واليوان والين والدولار والروبل والروبية🌐🇺🇳🇪🇺🇨🇳Euorasia ملفات دولية (🇺🇦🇮🇷🇮🇱🇰🇵🇹🇼) وصفقات التوقيع لاتبادل التجاري بين بروكسل وشنغهاي ممكن ان تصل لترليون يورو او ترليون يوان
"Old Bomber" = Tu-16
ages like an asian, 60 years old but looks half the age
How old are the B52s
Nice video. Can you please upload one narrated in English?
这东西就剩个壳子看着挺老，里面的航电系统全是新的，大部分机龄都很新，世界上规模最大的轰炸机编队可不是骗人的，相比起美国和俄国的超音速突防和隐身突防，我们更注重防区外打击❤😂
They absolutely don’t lol but you can keep trying to convince urself that’s the situation
if the H8 project did not stoped at that time, today we can see real 4 engine large naval bombers, that will be the true legend
maybe one day the under going H20 will have its naval variant, at this time the naval strike planes has been phased out for years, when talk about naval strike plane, the first thing come to my mind is A7D, the second is JH7, the third is tornado ADS
but what if a 4 engine 300 ton naval bomber?
hahaha
IT is not H-6, It is H6z-Pro-Max-Plus-Extreme-Ultra
hahahaha
Hold on, is this the plane from command and conquer general zero hour?
The one which drop carpet bomb and dust bomb?
No that's the Y-8
Unlike Russia and the US, China never has a supersonic strategic bomber, just the H-6. Perhaps it never needs a supersonic one. The H-20 is said to be another subsonic aircraft but with stealth.
制造超音速轰炸机不是什么高难度。你可以看到整个中国军事发展都是最近10年才开始大规模爆发的，因为在2010年之前中国将更多的精力用于发展经济，而俄罗斯美国因为冷战遗留所以有很多军事积累，但是其实对于现在的中国来说那不是什么高科技军事技术
还有2014年之前中国的海军规模甚至不到现在的5分之一，2014年中国甚至只有几架j20，但是现在中国完全不一样，在所有民用科技军事科技领域都在全年爆发，所以我认为超音速轰炸机不是什么高科技技术，对于中国这样一个世界最大工业国来说
美国拥有冷战遗留下来的大量老旧军舰航母战斗机，而中国要在存量上军事装备数量超过美国需要再等10年，因为中国也需要按部就班的发展军事，而不是大规模投资军费生产太多的武器
@@恶魔巫师-y4f The Ukrainian SMO has shown that attrition of weapons and manpower is critical factor in modern warfare due to pervasive ISR from satellites to drones and the precision weapons system used. China is well placed as undisputed industrial manufacturing master to fight modern attrition war. Hope it never happens but China will surely prevail if provoked into it.
@@GenghisX999我认为中国与美国肯定会有一场战争，因为美国为了维护霸权甚至可能会对中国使用核武器，就像美国内部一些人明白科技战无法遏制中国只会让中国科技变得无所不能，但是美国的体制以及帝国利益驱动让美国依旧对中国发动了科技战，而军事上我认为也是如此，即便美国内部有些人明白无法通过战争战胜中国，但是帝国利益驱动美国最终依旧会对中国发动战争，其实中国也在准备对美战争，因为中国明白统一台湾不能改变什么，如果中国统一台湾那么中国依旧会面临来自日本美国韩国的遏制，并且西方会集体对中国进行制裁，所以这就是为什么中国对台湾是让台湾不要法理独立，因为中国最终明白要么美元崩溃，要么美军彻底被中国从西太平洋摧毁，这就是为什么中国一直在认真备战，包括购买了世界一半粮食用于战略储备，以及扩充战略核力量，包括大量扩充中远程战略核力量对准了美国在第二岛链印度洋的所有军事基地，无论中国是主动与美国开战还是美国主动与中国开战这场战争是无可避免的
These Russian platforms r very ruged durable and china has utilised these russia platforms with their own versions. Good
The largest Bomber fleet in the world, almost equal to Russia + US
六爷再好，毕竟老了。H-20千呼万唤不出来，希望是在憋大招，等待一举成名天下惊的那一天
估计是没了，主要太贵了，不划算。飞机再能飞也飞不过导弹。导弹能覆盖北半球主要国家的核心城市带就没必要专门搞个轰炸机。
Just saying… we aren’t affraid these things 🤭 🥱
水水水
👍👍👍
Who's afraid????lol
Of course, the TU16 is such a scary 70 year old design 😂😅!
as is the B-52 right?
Looks like a puffin bird
Fear? :)
They send in little factory kids.
Thought they sent in you.
I don't think anybody fears this thing in the west.
Nothing special
Like you.
@@RADICALFLOAT_95
Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
!!!! DON'T TOUCH HER !!!!!
Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
Umm No. No one fears your decrepit old plane
Triggered over a RUclips video .. What a winner in life
@@kimchiba4570
Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
!!!! DON'T TOUCH HER !!!!!
Who let the little dogs out?
Who, who, who, who, who?
I bet it does not work properly.
What dosent work, your junk?
the most stupid comment i've read today..... if it doesn't work, how can it stick around for this long?
@@fatdoi003He is confused with the F-35 planes. 😂
I'll see that bet and double it.........
Didn't the H-6 cruise around Japan a lot?
just like B52H ,compared to B52A,had changed a lot
this one can carry DF17 ... DF17 means pioneer for breaking the Door ...
China should have also bought the Tu-22M when they had the chance.
轰6携带一枚东风26中远程弹道导弹才是最厉害的
hahaha Pointing finger at you
B52?
CHINA NOT TAIWAN 🎉🎉
Say, what's an EARCRAFT?????