Japan, U.S. at Odds Over China's Air Zone

[winton]

In what universe are the B52's antiquated?

That doesn't detract from the fact that the B52 has some uses and is therefore not obsolete.

[Triple C]

Are you arguing B-52s are no longer an effective weapon of war?

[Triple C]

you set such a low bar for friendship. Koreans would be offended, justifiably.

I doubt it. They are too busy being offended at China. Pissing off Korea and Japan at the same time is a remarkable fumble and did much to neutralize the bite from China's accusation of past Japanese imperialism.

[Bigfella]

Are you arguing B-52s are no longer an effective weapon of war?

Don't feed the trolls!

[winton]

Are you arguing B-52s are no longer an effective weapon of war?

I think its been effective against the Taliban. I can't complain.

[winton]

I doubt it. They are too busy being offended at China. Pissing off Korea and Japan at the same time is a remarkable fumble and did much to neutralize the bite from China's accusation of past Japanese imperialism.

the ADIZ doesn't piss a korean off as much as the thought of having his women raped by the Japanese. I'm pretty sure nothing tops that. ADIZ will blow over.

[Doktor]

I think its been effective against the Taliban. I can't complain.

And Serbs and Iraqis...

[Officer of Engineers]

And Vietnam

[Triple C]

I think its been effective against the Taliban. I can't complain.

Oh brother... You ought to check the types of munitions the B-52 is capable of bearing... I am sure it's on wikipedia...

[Officer of Engineers]

Why bother, he will just get a blog written by anyone to say otherwise.

[Josh]

I'm sure the H-6...

That doesn't detract from the fact that the B52 has some uses and is therefore not obsolete.

...isn't antiquated, despite having an airframe designed in the same time period as the B-52 and the best versions still requiring Russian engines to have greatly inferior range and payload. :)

Its quite useless to reason with this particular individual; I'm surprised so many people are investing such effort.

[Double Edge]

Based on your hypothesis, if its shallow for the chinese subs, it'll be shallow for the Japanese subs et al. So that only leaves us with littoral ships of which china has plenty and Japan has too few and the US has diddly at the moment (or at least until they get their LCS together but then where to base those death traps?)

Want to clarify that its not my hypothesis. Was stated by the speaker from this talk.

Bonji Ohara, research fellow at the Tokyo Foundation and retired Maritime Self-Defense Force captain, provided his analysis of these diplomatic and security dynamics involving Korea from Japan’s viewpoint and based on his personal experience in China and Korea.

Bonji Ohara is a research fellow and project manager at the Tokyo Foundation where he focuses on foreign and security policy. He previously served as an analyst for IHS Jane’s and served as Japan’s naval attaché in Beijing.

[Dreadnought]

...isn't antiquated, despite having an airframe designed in the same time period as the B-52 and the best versions still requiring Russian engines to have greatly inferior range and payload. :)

Its quite useless to reason with this particular individual; I'm surprised so many people are investing such effort.

*According to the info I have, the re-engine process has yet to take place and they were looking more closely at Rolls Royce RB211535E-4 for the replacements although more expensive but would offer better fuel savings and range.

[Josh]

*According to the info I have, the re-engine process has yet to take place and they were looking more closely at Rolls Royce RB211535E-4 for the replacements although more expensive but would offer better fuel savings and range.

I thought the H-6K, the new build planes, employed Russian turbo fans and had a lot more range and payload than previous versions. But I could be wrong.

[gf0012-aust]

from Janes Defense Weekly:

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) recently received 15 Xian H-6K bombers with nuclear capabilities, according to Jane’s Defence Weekly.

The H-6K, an updated version of the H-6 bomber (originally, a locally built version of the 1960s vintage Russian Tupolev Tu-16 bomber), is a medium-sized craft designed for long-range attacks, stand-off attacks and large-area air patrol. Unlike its predecessor, the H-6K can carry cruise missiles under its wings. The H6-K also maneuvers more deftly than the H-6 and requires a smaller crew to operate. H-6K reportedly has a combat radius of 3,500 km. It can carry weapons in the internal weapon bay and on four underwing pylons. The nuclear-capable Changjian-10 (long sword) CJ-10A cruise missiles it carries have a range of 1,500-2,000 km, effectively extending the bomber’s combat range to 4,000-5,000 km – long enough to reach Okinawa, Guam and even Hawaii from China’s mainland.

Andy would have some more relevant data if he's lurking....