The NEW Chinese Bomber Fleet is working.

In the last few years the Chinese bombers, the H-6, have evolved because of the new training syllabus of the Chinese pilots. Let's have a look!
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/...
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.c...
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@philipdavis7521]

One thing this shows clearly is just how useful size is in aircraft. its striking how many 'obsolete' and expensive big mid 20th Century bombers are proving to be useful decades past their design lifetime.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Good point.

[@ViceCoin]

Unmanned drones can replace manned bombers.

[@berrigo2]

​@@ViceCoin Maybe in a few years but atm unmanned platforms aren't there yet

[@dereklinscott8488]

Room for payload and power generation capability. The F35s engine upgrade appears to be desired for electronic power supply more than kinematic performance. Has that ever been the case before? Every other engine upgrade I can think of was reliability (F-14B) or performance (Big Motor F-15s). Big planes probably also have a lot more headroom in terms of power generation. Wonder what a re-engined B52 can do in that regard? Probably a great test bed or even deployment option for lasers/microwaves/whatever else.

[@ViceCoin]

@@berrigo2 Drones are proving themselves in Ukraine.

[@danielalicea1220]

We really should be thanking you for your insight. I dont understand the hate you get, your giving an honest OPINION, with the best of your knowledge. So, I thank you for your knowledge, and appreciate your POV.

[@lohikarhu734]

"hate"? That seems a totally dumb response to someone who tries to give the most complete and balanced reporting and analysis of where military aviation is, and where it's going... Some people are just resistant to having an open mind, and resistant to the concept of "my opinion was changed by..."

[@wst8340]

The only Hate,like in the US itself is from the Democrat Party of violent hatefully people.

[@dyu999]

@@lohikarhu734 I want to be open minded, but face this antique, sorry, I can't

[@roberthavran2522]

@@dyu999 It's a missile taxi launching missiles at standoff range. It doesn't matter if the airframe is antique. What matters here is the missiles not the airframe.

[@roberthavran2522]

@@dyu999 It won't fly in range of enemy air defences or fighter cover.

[@merocaine]

Your looking well sir, I hope you recovered well after your recent procedure.

[@zhoubaidinh403]

What was the procedure?

[@Pieregov2.0]

@@zhoubaidinh403 heart

[@dorkf1sh]

You can mock an adversary for lack of capability, but you would be very foolish to ignore it when they recogize that lack and take aggressive action to address it

[@jimmyconway7554]

lol shut up.... china builds junk no matter what ur mouth says slick rick david lolol shut up... moms house is ur cup of tee lololol

[@Firespectrum122]

Same energy as "never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

[@nitroxide17]

It’s never wise to underestimate an adversary.

[@Rightonrightoff]

Why is china considered an adversary? It’s not China that has military bases in every corner of the world and bullying others into submission. It’s not China that topples governments at will and destroys the lives of millions. It’s not China that’s surrounding another country with its aircraft carriers and strategically placed weapons. It’s insane to see how the bad guys convinced themselves they’re the good ones and brainwash their children as well. Unreal.

[@ghostmourn]

Never more true than when dealing with China. Their unique mixture of capitalism and communism makes them a very formidable adversary.

[@xXrandomryzeXx]

@𝕷𝖚𝖈𝖎𝖋𝖊𝖗 𝖃 They are considered an enemy to the West militarily because of Taiwan. Despite the Chinese being in a quite good of a relationship with the USA during WW2, since the appearance of the second china, or Taiwan, Mainland China has become an enemy to NATO.

[@nemiw4429]

How could you underestimate China? Bedore closing ther country to outsiders, they hsd a fleet of thousands modern ships that could transport an army of millions and take Europe. They decided not to, because they dint see any value in Europe. They tried Japan, but efefytime a Taifun (I think thats where the word comes fromy), smashed their invasion forces and they gave up. How unlucky can you get.

[@suntzu1409]

-- Sun Tzu

[@jiasunzhang8001]

The H6 is like a car model, every generation it will adapted new components like power windows, bluetooth,GPS and eventually essentail components like engin and gearbox or even car frame.

[@arthurvandeman]

exc. analysis, exceptionally rare to get this quality of analysis on plaaf training.

[@hyhhy]

Damn, that South China Sea archipelago full of Chinese airbases is like a network of fixed-in-place aircraft carriers.

[@zeqc2022]

Don't u American bases all over the world

[@mattadams7922]

I mean if you're gonna invade a space and claim it as yours you're gonna have to build defenses for it. They are after the resource rights to what was found there. They have literally been building islands to claim as their territory to extend their borders to illegally claim resources that used to be in international waters or closer to other countries. China is doing some straight wild west baffoonery in the south china sea.

[@chewwaileong8199]

Google : ‘Damn there are more than 750 US military bases around the world, US is the peace lover ..”

[@Andy-P]

aircraft carriers that carn't move and have no water.

[@MikoyanGurevichMiG21]

@@Andy-P China isn't new to this at all. The entirety of the UK was basically just that during both WW2 and the Cold War.

[@wengy78]

That device hanging under the tail section when the H-6 has its gear down, looks like a tail strike guard.

[@andyf4292]

wondering if it was an arrrestor hook!

[@Stinger522]

I will give the Chinese credit where credit is due. I see the evolution of their military from what it was in the 50s to what it is now as just the natural order of things.

[@f1aziz]

Even till the 90s they were stuck with old doctrines, Dessert Storm basically shocked them and made them realize they were so far behind.

[@naughtyfrog8257]

even as late as the early 2000s the PLA and the police were corrupted and busy with enterprises. That was a period of getting rich and quick. But the evolution of China and the CPC turned towards housekeeping with Xi Jing Ping, a lot of the things we’re seeing today were seeded back in the late 2000s and then got executed by XJP post 2012.

[@ArchOfficial]

I guess you can contrast it to the Russians, who due to various reasons are effectively still using the 1979 doctrine. China has completely revamped all of their high-end capabilities, although their true bread-and-butter capabilities haven't progressed much past the 80s to be honest. Either way, they still have managed to surpass Russia in high-end conventional capabilities, which was always considered to be stronger than them.

[@ex0duzz]

We haven't seen them fight a war since 79 and even in that they did not use air force or even the navy. So saying they have not progressed since the 80s doesn't mean much and also is not true whatsoever. There is no comparison with the chinese military and economy of the 80s to the 2020s. They have domestic 5th gen fighter production now including engines. They have 100,000 ton emals catobar carriers, with the next one likely being nuclear, within 1-2 decades at most. They have the most powerful surface combatant in the world with type 55 destroyer. They have their own global navigation and positioning system, Beidou. Their electronics, sensors, chips, radars, everything is already far superior to Russians and even Americans. Their missiles already out range and out sense and out maneuver Americas versions, especially hypersonics. China literally introduced a rocket force before USA space force. China was and is currently still in the process of restructuring their whole military and copying usa doctrine with cutting their overall size and having much less total number of troops but higher training and better armed. They are moving to high tech high information high networked battle environment. Completely different from 80, or even 2000s. One decade in China is a century in USA, let alone 2 decades in China. They are the world leaders of autonomous systems including dominating 80% of global civilian drone market. They are AI leaders, in drones and autonomous systems which allowed them to land on far side of the moon, land drone on Mars, do a noon sample return mission and have their own advanced permanent space station which is the only rival to the ISS and will have a moon.base by 2030. China only had their first manned mission in like 2001 or 2003, can't remember which year exactly but look where they are now with their space program, which is heavily tied with their military and civilian technological advancements. If they can pull off all their space stuff impeccably(which they did first time Everytime), you can be pretty confident that their high tech military advancements are very real. Ie if they can land on mars and do far side of moon and sample return missions and can build and run a permanent space station by themselves, you can trust them to be able to take out all your satellites, military bases, ports, power plants, hit your all your major cities, hit your carriers and destroyers, detect and take out your subs and "stealth" jets etc. Unless of course you believe that story about the US nuclear sub crashing into an undersea mountain somewhere in the south China seas near Chinese military bases due to "old maps" or "bad sensors and human error" etc lol

[@gilbertponder5307]

I'm sure you've gotten this answer before now, but the appendage marked by the arrow at 0:44 appears to be a retractable tail strike skid (compatible with the depicted AC being in landing configuration.)

[@tolson57]

It is a tail strike bumper. The Concord had one, but it had wheels.

[@roberthavran2522]

0:44 That's maybe a protection against tailstrike during takeoff.

[@zahnatom]

why though? is their training that bad? it also protrudes so far down that it might actually inhibit normal rotation during take off

[@oniichan4909]

@Zahnatom you say that like accidents don't happen in western airforces aswell?

[@doc0core]

@@oniichan4909 Tail strikes never happens with the good guys.

[@roberthavran2522]

@@zahnatom There are plenty of examples for tailstrike in commercial aviation and commercial airlines pilot are trained to a very high standard. My point is it can happen time to time even with well trained pilots so it's better to have some tail protection.

[@dicksontong6498]

@@roberthavran2522 And commercial airlines pilot could get aid from the airport to avoid this, but not for the airforce

[@Sacto1654]

The Chinese are using the H-6 primarily as a stand-off strike platform, something that the original Tu-16 had since the late 1950's in Russian service. That means the H-6 will primarily fly over the Chinese coast to launch its anti-shipping missiles against any known adversary.

[@ltribley]

Older air frames are not that much of a concern in an era when most missions are fought in "stand-off" [attacks with cruise missiles]. It might be the major reason why you have to question the U.S. cold war thinking in designing and building the "eventual" and costly 100 B-21's to replaced the B-1 and B-2 by 2040. Russia and China have the most advanced integrated multi-layered air defense systems in the world that are "fatal" upwards of 1000+ kilometers. The U.S. and NATO combined do not have the technology, skills or funding to defeat these systems. (Royal United Services Institute, 2020) If the B-21 ever come to fruition by 2040 it's unlikely to see them used in anything other than "stand-off" and by then both Russia and China will have improved their air defense to the point where the idea of using conventional aircraft at all will be a thing of the past. Today Russia's (and likely China's) air defense systems are capable of downing a small drone, HIMAR's, and even hypersonic missiles. Example: Russian S-300V4 missile system neutralized both Ukrainian Su-27 and MiG-29 aircraft at extreme ranges of 217km, surpassing the 150km range world record set previously. (Defence View, 10/2022)

[@Markipedia]

I don´t want to get politically here but i just gotta mention: nobody says "China" better than Donald Trump.

[@gravyd316]

Why don't you ask China......

[@deth3021]

​@@gravyd316 because he lives in a free country you authoritarian and he doesn't have to.

[@Dante-fk4yi]

Gyna

[@notyourtypical4915]

I think you should walk on the chines shoes , and remember the past what the west did to china during the century of humiliation, then understand why china want to be strong enough to defend itself and to deter western power to do what they did the past , western always talking about china when they visit latin America Africa and other countries, and don't want to share world power with others just want for himself, that's why they don't get support for Ukraina from other countries outside Europe and usa Canada

[@berrigo2]

One of the few things he did well

[@dariomendoza191]

GREAT JOB !!! CHINA greetings from Mexico!!!

[@freeworld88888]

h6k is not like the old bomber, today the bombers are with new engines and new composite materials for strength and light weight. And can go very far and carrying more missiles too. The pla is building more and upgrade more.

[@cannonfodder4376]

Ah a good informative M7 video to start the week. A good birthday gift as well. Informative as always.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Happy birthday!

[@mustafaarsalan4951]

I do love this video because so many people dismiss Chinese air/naval/ground capabilities as a "Made in China = Bad" joke and fail to recognize China has been working around the clock both in terms of military production & R&D as well as economic influence over impoverished nations. The first step to losing a war is underestimating the enemy.

[@katprowler6805]

Most people especially in the western world seem to forget that China did not appear out of thin air or an anomaly. They were a 'superpower' long before the US or Russia and has an advanced civilization thats almost as old as ancient Egyptians and ancient Greeks.

[@datoolz0]

The only countries that takes Zhongguo technical ability completely seriously is its neighbors. Bharat, Vietnam, Nihon, Hanguk. All of which can be the next Ukraine depending on how things turn out. Lucky that Taiwan is up next!

[@industrialrobot434]

Why don't you type this? -Sun TZU

[@edisonone]

🤩🤩🤩 You sound like you are giving a lecture on Chinese strategic thinking from some university or something, professor, or should we address you as Dr. Millennium! It just baffles me as to why or how it is that you know so much about my country while I’m plain s blank about it! 🤩🤩🤩

[@teashea1]

very excellent video ----- nicely produced with fine content. Robo is a good producer. ..... or is he just the executive producer?

[@charleschidsey2831]

Glad to have you back. Great content as always.

[@daniels0376]

0:44 Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that that thing is basically there to prevent the tail from hitting the ground during take-off/landing. A bunch of WW2 designs had something completely identical looking. Maybe it's something else tho idk

[@xushenxin]

Air plane tire can only be used a few times before replacement, if it lands and takes off from Tibet plateau. It is very difficult.

[@christophe5756]

This was an excellent video. 👍🏽👍🏽

[@philipspencer1834]

Very useful analysis…. Thank you 😎👍

[@adr1uno638]

the H-6k is beautiful, they should make an AWACS out of it

[@alexlo7708]

It has less operation hrs to transport aircrafts.

[@breadnewbie6326]

most likely y20 because it's the newest, but I don't know too much about this matter, actually.

[@naughtyfrog8257]

It is believed the Y20 will have an AWAC variant

[@khurrammustaqeem8194]

Professor is the best in Chinese Military Strategies

[@sunseb5124]

Hope you are feeling good after your health issues. Take care.

[@stupidburp]

H-6 is a bit less capable than B-52 but is nevertheless good enough for some long range missile attacks. The PLA has also boasted about getting a new bomber soon. This might not be just empty propaganda because there has been evidence of progress.

[@mjabb02]

What's makes H-6 is dangerous because it can carry air launched ASBM, air launched HGV and long range cruise missile (CJ-20).

[@deathdrone6988]

When I saw the title, thought he was talking about the Xian H-20. Clickbaited myself.

[@b.griffin317]

0:45 Trail strike skid like on the Concord.

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

Some of China's H6 are quite new actually.

[@horusfalcon]

Yes. Even though the design is originally from the late 1940s (the Tu-16 originally flew in 1952), the Chinese have been building them steadily and very recently. It is possible they bear only an external resemblance to the original.

[@joelau2383]

@@horusfalcon Actually, China build the new version with new material and manufacturing method.

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

Indeed, they may look like an old Tu-16 Badger, but they are certainly not one! They not match the bomber force of the 🇺🇸, but then China doesn't have the same foreign policy of flying around the world, bombing the crap out of anyone who dares disagree with them! 🤔

[@lktan224]

Newly built and upgraded with avionics.

[@donscheid97]

I noticed the crews shown were wearing cotton gloves, not fire resistant. Grip is less and not very protective in emergency. But don't tell them. I have started second guessing the evaluation of Chinese capabilities based on Russian capability in Ukraine and I assume the USSR was better than Russia is now, but Generals don't have the luxury of not underestimating without consequences.

[@johnwang9730]

Guess what? There has been tons of teasing of the cotton gloves on Chinese social media, and PLAAF is well aware of it😂

[@barbarapitenthusiast7103]

You dont have to assume the ussr is better than russia, because it was.

[@GalaxyCat001]

0:44 could it be there so that it touches the ground before the aircraft body does if the pilot takes off at the wrong angle & it gives them a chance to correct the take off before real damage is done.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

☝

[@martinolivera3580]

Great to have you back !!!!!! You loose some weight too !!!!!!!

[@simonyip5978]

A recent report by the ASPI (Australian Strategic Policy Institute) states that China is now the world leader in 37 of 44 strategic technologies . Biotechnology, lasers, hypersonic propulsion, artificial intelligence, energy research, new materials, etc. The Chinese know that technological knowledge is vital and the Chinese are beginning to dominate many different technologies. My point is that the old narrative that China can only copy and steal from others is no longer true, they have the necessary money, the Institutions and universities, the industrial capabilities and the political will to not only catch up with the western world, but to actually overtake the west in technological development.

[@ollebrandt]

Dear content creator (and for me friend...), now I have Patronized you.... You are contributing to a much more informed group of people asking for more understandable explanations to a number of hard-to-understand air defense (and possibly attack) questions... Two questions that have struck me is A) Why are bombers so differently designed in comparison to freighters and commercial aircrafts? B) Why aren't more aircraft build with a dual purpose usage in mind - reusing the airplane platform from a civilan airplane to a military purpose like AWACs actually are... I am thinking of Sub defeating planes, etc. - And now it struck me - this must be a major field for future AI drones... crossing the oceans like condors, just "listening", starting the "beeping" when a large magnetic body or anomaly(named radio/data transmission), or some poke in the sea surface (named periscope or antenna) shows up.... This has been the task of the deep sea listening boys, so far. But I guess they are pretty expensive to maintain......

[@zofe]

Tu-16 Badger by any name

[@TheKeithvidz]

I approve the DRAGON RISE.

[@imbetterthanyouis]

that part was a tail bump skid

[@edisonone]

. 60’s ERA GERIATRICS: When *the going gets tough and the tough gets going so to speak*, AERIAL REFUELING MAKES THE DIFFERENCE and, since ALL are SUBSONIC 50’S ERA SOECIMENS and they all are still tasked with the job, I’d say hurrah to each and everyone of them… Besides, we know for a fact that one is sea skimming/terrain hugging much like an ASM or like that of an LACM, that’s another feature to added to its usefulness… last I read, all three are scheduled to fly full speed into the 2050’s and that the most mind boggling of them all!!! .

[@thefrecklepuny]

Looks like an anti skid device? In case a plane over rotates at take off and prevents skid damage to the fuselage.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

☝

[@ld871111]

Some cited the poor performance of Russians in Ukraine to demonstrate how China will perform equally as bad. A major difference between China and Russia is that China has the funding and resources to conduct large-scale combined arms exercises on a regular basis, whereas Russians mostly kept their pre-war maneuvers at BTG level or lower. In addition, China has been updating its arsenal at a much faster pace, especially in PGM and sensors. China has surpassed Russia on military modernization long ago. The question is not whether the PLA is more effective than the Russian military, but how much more?

[@richardbudd5334]

And even more corruption in their military than the Russians too!

[@doc0core]

About combat experience: here's my very arm-chair expert kind of "unbiased" view. At the personal and equipment and combat units level, indeed recent combat experience is very much lacking in the PLA. Esp. if you consider the post-reform (1978) era PLA had zero war to fight and nearly zero truly hostile encounters. I can hardly come up with a shooting incident in 44 years. But in terms of army-level pride/tradition/spirits PLA is actually pretty strong with the long march, anti-Japan war, second civil war, Korean war, albeit those were fought using poorly-trained poorly-equipment, technologically inferior conscripted soldiers, instead of the high-tech smaller, professional, recruited army of modern PLA. By comparison, USA is both strong with endless hot combat experience and with traditions going back to WWI and even before (defeating England, Canada and Mexico). With Japan... I'm not sure, Japan's military was awesome up to WWII, but (hopefully) that tradition was broken (at least in the personnel level) after 1945. I'd be highly surprised if there's a native Japanese active duty commander who's capable of planning and conducting a meaningful military operation, independent of US control. Another case to consider: Qing's had world-class military experience to around 1750, but in about less than a century, Qing's army diminished to a global laughing stock, humiliated by even third rated European nations (Russia, Italy...) and upstart Japan. So about current combat experience. Indeed any military can greatly benefit from combat experience, no better way to discover real men than to make them watch their buddies blown to pieces or lost a few limbs. But there's a cost to gaining that experience that must be considered in a balanced manner. Chinese decision makers are all deeply influenced by Sun Tzu, heavily emphasize secrecy, deception, misinformation and confusion. So PLA often chose not to show their hands unless there's a strategic goal being served. Which yes indeed deprived PLA soldiers and commanders of valuable experience. But how valuable is that actual experience, well maybe PLA needs it less than some other militaries of the world. Sun Tzu also teaches that a military's true purpose and measurement is not killing enemies and blowing things up, but to serve strategic and political goals. And always a bloodless means to achieving said goals is preferrable. So yes there is very serious legit questioning the combat ability of PLAN and PLAAF (J-20, J-11, J-16, H-6, Y-20 and the expected H-20, and the many impressive-looking surface and submarine craft esp. the never tested Type-94 and work-in-progress Type-003) in an actual shooting war. But their value to the regime is also enhanced by the uncertainty and doubt of all parties concerned. E.g. we are quite sure that Virginia and Seawolf class are superior to Type-94, and Ford has been deplyed and almost combar ready for decades already while it's comparable Type-004 is only on the drawing board. But CCP's goal is not to win any hypothetical combar/war, but to discourage military adventurism. The question isn't who made superior weapons, but who can be self-confident of a no-cost victory? Can anyone be sure USA will definitely win a nuclear war agianst China without unacceptable losses on the US mainland? Uncertainty encourages indecision (by either sides), which in China's favor. Transparency allows risk management, which favors the top dog. Final point is: sometimes combat experience can have negative values. I'm not talking about the cost (expended lives and munitions) here; I'm talking about, sometimes, soldiers who gained actual shooting and killing experience can become less effective soldiers than greenhorns. Commanders who are rewarded/punished for measurable combat stats instead of stragetic outcome become cynical and career-oriented. High suicide rate, high prevalency of mental sickness, alcoholism, substance-dependence, crime rate, non-op casualty rate, etc are all hints that certain militaries (PLA's enemies) are diminished not strengthened by actual combat experience.

[@johnwang9730]

Great comment. But a few things to add on: technically PLA had a few battles in the 80s. A well known case is the 1984 battle of Laoshan. The current no1 PLA general Zhang Youxia fought in the battle as a regiment commander. Of course these can’t be compared with the experience of the US military, but also note that US haven’t been in a war with a comparable adversary for a long time either. It’s hard to say how much USAF’s experience in Afghanistan would help in a conflict with PLA

[@hectorherrera8402]

👍

[@BassCannonSan]

>But how valuable is that actual experience, well maybe PLA needs it less than some other militaries of the world. Look how Russia is doing, being barely able to move few kilometers beyond their border. Just because China follows some ancient platitudes doesnt mean they will magically dominate whereas every other inexperienced army gets their teeth kicked in. Your comment is extremely wishy washy and grabs at straws to achieve the most ridicolous conclusions like suggesting that experience is not a huge net positive for military effort.

[@bryf2787]

@@BassCannonSanThe same can be said about the opposite, despite the experience the US and Russia had for decades, they still flop from time to time.

[@BassCannonSan]

@@bryf2787 What USA flops? They are able to deploy troops on another continent, establish McDonald's franchise here blunder at tactical level and still keep the losses on a reasonable level. There is no other country that can showcase such military proficiency. Meanwhile China would be barely able to support an amphibious assault on an island few miles away from mainland

[@johndelong5574]

The first age was destroyed by water. The second by fire.

[@NullElemental]

yeah because anti aircraft railguns and lasers aren't going to be a thing soon

[@PrimericanIdol]

The entire PLA is undergoing some serious transformation to become an NCO-based structure as opoosed to strictly top-down.

[@jk3jk35]

they've never been top-down. That's a stereotype for the Russians. The PLA has always been decentralized because it originated as a guerilla force.

[@jaredyoung5353]

Capitalist traded the middle class to china and in returned saved a few dollars at Walmart.

[@HauntedXXXPancake]

Communists kept 99 % of the fortune gained for members of the CCP, their families & cronies.

[@matsv201]

0:44 that looks like a tail protector.(for landing)

[@nicholasmaude6906]

I know the H-6 is basically a licensed-produced Chinese version of the Tupolev Tu-16 Badger, what I wonder is why the PRC didn't approach the USSR in the 1950s before the Sino-Soviet split to the license to produce the Tu-95 Bear?

[@douginorlando6260]

It 0:45 looks like a sonobuoy release chute. But instead of dropping sonar sensors into the ocean, my guess it’s something else … an EM decoy? A throwaway sensor drone to identify suspicious surface objects? If it is for releasing sonobuoys, then perhaps it’s because it can arrive at a search zone faster than their anti sub aircraft? Or to compliment anti sub aircraft?

[@OXYOXYOXY444]

your vids rock

[@brentmchenry9273]

another great video, keep 'em coming!

[@vilx1308]

Tu-16 but will make the original designer say “wtf”

[@mattkelly2004]

I am certain of one thing, if china ever does field a large amount of aircraft carriers, or establishes airfields abroad that would be a checkmate, the only thing limiting them that I can see is they are restrained to china and only have one operational carrier

[@jonseilim4321]

China just doesn't have any military requirements abroad so overseas military bases are unnecessary, they don't even form military alliances with other nations

[@ArchOfficial]

Why would it be a checkmate if equipment, training and cultural factors still disadvantage them? At most they would have theoretical parity.

[@katprowler6805]

Relax. .. Aside from Taiwan, China is not really into the empire building nor has any global.ambitions. even back in the days of admiral Cheng Ho they nvr invaded nor land grab any parts of Asia. It would've been all to easy.

[@SteelheadCrusher]

Taiwan is a province of China. Saying the PRC wants to empire build with Taiwan is like saying the US wants to do the same with Alaska. Taiwan is part of China. 80% of people living in Taiwan identify as Chinese. Whatever you think is going on over there is a fabrication of people like Lindsey Graham.

[@ArchOfficial]

@@katprowler6805 Literally the entirety of China's territory are colonies from land grabs. China does intend to control the entire world and they claim they will eventually achieve it in the long run once the "decadent capitalists" fall as a "matter of nature".

[@Real_Claudy_Focan]

0:45 Tail strike skid

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

☝

[@rohampasha9667]

like the sports jacket , makes you look alot thinner:))

[@defenstrator4660]

It’s tough to say big old aircraft are obsolete. The US is busy upgrading its fleet of BUFFs because they’re the only thing that do the job. Those old air craft can lob big cruise missiles at carrier fleets as well as anything else.

[@mitkooo1]

9:40 It looks like a skid plate, but very strange location. This is my best guess.

[@matheuscerqueira7952]

*Fortunately we have seen them at work last year

[@wonderwang1585]

Pilots of H6 is really handsome. All walk from 西遊記，brothers of zu baje

[@plasmafoal1117]

When will we see a video about the changes happening to the Polish airforce and the FA-50 in particular?

[@josephsmith6777]

A giant portion of the USAs airplanes are transport tankers and AWACS etc

[@TurboHappyCar]

Great video, appreciate the analysis! 👍

[@thusitha320]

What is the strategic use of a strategic bomber (especially a non-stealth one) against a near-peer opponent? Aren't they too visible and too unmaneuverable to survive their missions? If the enemy has any air defences at all, can a bomber ever get close enough to use bombs (and not missiles)? Is the purpose of a bomber to ferry big ass missiles (that are two heavy for multirole fighters) to high altitudes?

[@douginorlando6260]

China must be developing a supersonic bomber comparable in performance to Russia’s TU160 and US’s XB70. But designed around one mission … launch a very large missile at very high altitude and velocity. The range of large hypersonic glide missiles eliminates the need for huge fuel tanks for long range … and by keeping the bomber’s weight at a minimum, a 60 second boost by injecting an oxidant to the engine afterburners will allow a pop up maneuver & significant acceleration in rarified air altitudes where drag is much lower than at 40,000 feet.

[@DeadBoy665]

You are plenty of thing very interested in me because that's exactly what we did in the 1940s and 50s 60s 70s and 80s we trained our Pilots to actually live on the plains actually do their job here's the thing Chinese planes are not made for long-range fighting Badger bombers were InterContinental to the euro Asian continents and did not have the state power to hit anywhere Pass Alaska. They have an old design with updated avionics engines and targeting systems it's not going to be much against our Weaponry Canada to fight off China.

[@ex0duzz]

H6k, aka god of war

[@brucebarnes8138]

They would have to use long range missiles, because it looks like they would be easy to shoot down. B52 can use long range missiles. B52 are not as easy to shoot down as one would think, that's not counting support of fighter aircraft.

[@Opusss]

Anyone who is still dismissing China out of hand either militarily, economically or diplomatically should not be considered a serious person. And anyone doing so in the military or government should be replaced immediately. China knows exactly where their shortcomings lie and they know exactly who to copy to correct them.

[@ArchOfficial]

Except that it is extremely misguided for China to copy the US as even due to just cultural factors it is unlikely for them to ever reach parity. They shouldn't be dismissed, but when the next war happens you too will see how much of a paper tiger China is after they get obliterated in a few days.

[@Jermo7899]

Key word “copy” where’s the innovation? I don’t dismiss China but don’t you think they may be building too quickly. When you’re rushing to put something out there mistakes are going to be made. Another problem I have with China is combat experience. They have never tested any of their equipment in a war. Also, soldiers act differently while under fire and not in a training exercise. I see the tech but where is the experience?

[@ArchOfficial]

@@Jermo7899 I think combat experience is extremely overhyped because we know from empiric data that soldiers get worse the more combat they see after a modest increase in ability after a few fights. However training is the opposite. China still does not train their ground forces in any way resembling even remotely realistic. The air-forces are much more reasonably trained, though. Their equipment is hot trash, especially in the small arms department. That is a given with their professional military being about 600,000 soldiers or so, and a bunch of policemen and reservists on top of that. They know it's junk, but it's the only way to produce to that scale with their resources. They do have mass, but the soviet union had more mass and NATO planned to win a war in which they were disadvantaged. Now just the US alone has the advantage over China. The only concerning thing is that nobody in the small-unit level knows how to fight a conventional war, but neither do they in China's forces, so I guess it's fair.

[@Jermo7899]

@@ArchOfficial when I used to play golf, I would pretend I was putting at the masters or teeing off on the 1st hole. I knew it wasn’t real therefore I might not try my hardest. Combat is a lot like that reason being in combat youre under stress, anger, hunger, worry and a whole plethora of emotions you may have never felt before. When you’re training you’re not experiencing those emotions ie: fighting for your life. Combat is chaos. When you have experienced soldiers who know how to filter out the chaos or bring some order to it. They will perform more effectively. I’m just saying nobody in the Chinese military knows how they will react when being shot at and seeing their friends killed. Some cant handle it. If you’ve never experienced a situation you will never know how yourself or anyone else will react. That’s why experience is important to me.

[@Jermo7899]

You can all the tech in the world. But when it comes down to “when it matters most” I’d rather depend on someone who has the experience to use the tech in a real battle scenario not a pretend one

[@RapideWombaticus]

That's your vacuum lol 😂

[@denkeylee]

Well done.

[@douginorlando6260]

Who needs stealth when you can launch swarms of anti ship missiles from hundreds of miles away?

[@chrissartain4430]

great Video !

[@leinad3305]

At the beginning, I would have worded it differently; there are three countries in the world that "currently operate strategic bombers", since I would argue the amount of countries that "can / have the ability to" operate "bombers" is a lot higher, than the number of countries that currently operate strategic bombers, though China could right now still be a bit controversial, given that in today's capability spectrum, the H-6 would be closer to a medium range bomber / large fighter-bomber or maritime strike aircraft. If a country like France, Germany, Britain, India, Turkey, Israel, Canada etc. would suddenly consider, that a long-range strike platform like a bomber would become necessary to preserve national security, (which is unlikely in today's military and political climate), then all these and other not listed countries, have the capability to field such planes, not necessarily to produce them natively, but certainly to acquire and operate a small fleet of 10 to 30 on their own. Other than this tiny nitpick, great video, I love to watch your narrations!

[@jamesross8410]

There is only one country that OPERATES strategic bombers and there are two countries that POSSESS strategic bombers is a more accurate statement.

[@horusfalcon]

@@jamesross8410 How do you figure? I'd really like to hear that in enough detail to convince me...

[@jamesross8410]

@@horusfalcon I need to convince you of nothing. If you cannot understand the definition, nature and employment of strategic bombers you have no business commenting.

[@suisinghoraceho2403]

On the other hand, what is a strategic bomber. If B2 is used to bomb out militia outposts in the Middle East, are they still “strategic bombers”?

[@jamesross8410]

@@suisinghoraceho2403 Short answer: Yes, they are still strategic bombers.

[@ooxx201]

After 50 years, we will have H-6Z, H6Zmaxpro.

[@bryf2787]

oh wow is this a new filming studio setup?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

No, it is just my house in Italy

[@bryf2787]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech nice house!

[@palitodeyerba]

0:06 and unfortuntelly we've seen them at work in the past... century?

[@matthewsheeran]

Is radio silence even an issue these days with spread spectrum, burst, digital, slow text and satellite comms: surely you can fly under the detectable radar (pun intended)!

[@patolt1628]

Your robot vacuum cleaner? 😉

[@Jermo7899]

I don’t dismiss China but don’t you think they may be building too quickly. When you’re rushing to put something out there mistakes are going to be made. Another problem I have with China is combat experience. They have never tested any of their equipment or soldiers in real combat. I see the tech but where’s the experience? Edit: am I the only one who sees this

[@jwickerszh]

Who do you think they should field test with?

[@SteelheadCrusher]

Where the hell is the combat experience of the US or its vassals? Sorry, but dropping JDAMs on wedding procession, or guys wearing sandals packing an AK at best, don't qualify as combat experience.

[@Jermo7899]

@@SteelheadCrusher when I used to play golf, I would pretend I was putting at the masters or teeing off on the 1st hole. I knew it wasn’t real therefore I might not try my hardest. in combat youre under stress, anger, hunger, worry and a whole plethora of emotions you may have never felt before. When you’re training you’re not experiencing those emotions ie: fighting for your life. Combat is chaos. When you have experienced soldiers who know how to filter out the chaos or bring some order to it. They will perform more effectively. I’m just saying nobody in the Chinese military knows how they will react when being shot at and seeing their friends killed. Some cant handle it. If you’ve never experienced a situation you will never know how yourself or anyone else will react. That’s why experience is important to me.

[@Jermo7899]

@@SteelheadCrusher calm down bro. It’s just an OPINION

[@Jermo7899]

@@SteelheadCrusher you don’t count 20 years fighting the Taliban as combat. Go tell that to a army ranger or navy seal whose friends died doing something you will never have the guts to do

[@ColdWarGhost77]

Can't tell from this angle but looks like an aerial refueling drogue.

[@yoppindia]

when you are so advanced and lazy, you cant use a broom to clean the runway.

[@andyf4292]

makes me wish the RAF had kept our bombers

[@lktan224]

England has no $$$$$$$$$$.

[@merlesmith6794]

0:45 it’s a tail skid.

[@mustang5132]

Extremely disappointed to see you advertising this model plane store which sells aircraft between 50-100% more than they are worth. This can be checked by looking at any reputable model aircraft store like aviation megastore or aviation retail direct. Quite a shame and feels almost like a scam. Very disappointing to see one of my favourite channels do this

[@neti_neti_]

👏👏👏

[@Andy-P]

It's based on the Russian Badger. Russian planes of that era are classics and will go on for ever. Well at least the Badger, Bear & MiG-21.

[@sharequsman596]

Nah mig 29 and 21 are junk now

[@shaider1982]

This is scary, their quality is getting better and they also have the quantity. Not to mention managing to supposedly hire ex-military pilots like the ex-USMC one arrested in Australia.

[@Carrera6rennsport]

the fact the hire Western pilots tells you the the PLA are decades behind the West.

[@davidthienshingvui2159]

Itu Aba island is under Taiwan ROC control.

[@fredfrond6148]

Wonder if China is building planes as fast as ships? China builds one British navy every four years.

[@jedispartancoolman]

Lot of China coverage from this Channel

[@jedispartancoolman]

@@gags730 at least once a lifetime lmao 😅

[@Carrera6rennsport]

aka the CCP/PLA soft propaganda channel

[@jedispartancoolman]

@@Carrera6rennsport thank you!

[@MM-wt2oo]

Another good video

[@videre8884]

Unfortunately, I don't have a good feeling when I see the Chinese armed forces improving. Thank you for your professional information. I look forward to more and more factual analyzes from you, which I can't find anywhere else on You Tube. Thank you for that and all the best for you and your channel.

[@meejinhuang]

Their bomber is ancient with ancient Russian engines.

[@lktan224]

They are new built with new Chinese engines and upgraded.

[@lktan224]

A toad in a well . Things above and around the well have changed.

[@rezzob]

the second B in Bomber, is silent

[@blengi]

when america achieves general AI hegemony amplifying the preexisting normative global western information infrastructure and standards in the next ten years, military capacity neglecting nukes will be entirely moot conceptually

[@muha0644]

So you're saying "China PLAA is good... but at what cost??"