J-20 not FC-31 Chosen as China’s Carrier-Borne Stealth Fighter


SCMP’s article “China’s navy ‘set to pick J-20 stealth jets for its next generation carriers’” on August 27 says that China has chosen J-20 instead of FC-31 as its carrier-borne stealth fighter.

There must be good reason for such a choice as to defend China’s trade lifelines on the ocean, J-20 will have longer-range and be better armed than F-35. J-20 is much heavier than F-35 so that it can carry better radar to detect and track F-35s before being detected by F-35 and be equipped with longer-range air-to-air missiles to hit F-35s before they can hit back. However, as China has not built any carriers with powerful catapult to help J-20 take off, it certainly is not in a position to make the choice; therefore, such a choice is but speculation.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on SCMP’s article, full text of which can be viewed at https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3024584/chinas-navy-set-pick-j-20-stealth-jets-its-next-generation.


Xi Rejects Duterts’s Arbitration Claim but Willing to Maintain Amity with Him


ABS-CBN News says in its report “Xi rejects Philippines’ arbitral win in South China Sea” yesterday”, “Chinese President Xi Jinping rejected the Philippines’ legal victory against China on the South China Sea after President Rodrigo Duterte raised the arbitral ruling during their bilateral meeting in Beijing Thursday.”

However, the report quotes Philippine Presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo as saying in a statement “Both President Duterte and President Xi agreed that while their variant positions will have to remain, their differences however need not derail nor diminish the amity between the two countries.” Moreover, it is still possible for the two countries to jointly explore and exploit the energy resources in the disputed waters according to the statement.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on ABS-CBN News’ report, full text of which can be viewed at https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/08/30/19/xi-rejects-philippines-arbitral-win-in-south-china-sea.


China’s Efforts to Revive Tarim River


The Tarim River is Chian’s longest inland river. Due to excessive use of its water, its lower reach dried in 1972. China has been making great efforts to conserve water to revive the river. China Daily’s article “Xinjiang discharges reservoir water in another effort to revive Tarim River” yesterday says that Xinjinag has injected water from Daxihaizi Reservoir into the river 20 times.

However, the source of water for the reservoir is limited so that the areas along the river have remained desert. If enough water is drawn from the Yarlung Zangbo River, Tibet to the Tarim, China may turn world second largest desert along the river, the Taklimakan Desert, into farm land.

The desert, bigger than half France will be able to provide agricultural goods more than enough for China’s own need. China will be able to compete with the US in exporting agricultrual products.

That will be a very expensive great project worthwhile for China to do.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on China Daily’s article, full text of which can be viewed at www.chinadailyglobal.com/a/201908/29/WS5d672d31a310cf3e35568820.html.


Bypass Malacca Strait–China’s BRI Strategic Connections to the West


Stratfor’s article “Casting an Eye on the Belt and Road Initiative” on August 28 describes China’s BRI as China’s worldwide ambitious initiative. If China were able to satisfy the needs for construction of infrastructures all over the world, it would certainly be an ambitious initiative to make China world leader. However, China is not rich enough to do so; therefore, it invites other countries to join it in the construction.

As the infrastructures may facilitate other countries’ investment and expansion of market in receiving countries, Japan and EU are interested but still have doubt whether joining China will help China become a world hegemon. Therefore, most of them would rather join the US to demonize China by description of China’s efforts as setting up “debt traps” to hurt receiving countries.

Stratfor’s article however, points out China’s efforts to avoid its BRI projects from becoming debt traps through renegotiation to reduce the debt burdens on receiving countries. However, it fails to see the strategic importance of BRI for China.

First, bypass the Malacca Strait. BRI first of all is aimed at China’s connections to its markets and sources of resources to its West. The old Silk Road is not so important as it’s on land while most trade now is carried out by shipping, which is much less expansive and has much greater volume.

Through development of infrastructures of roads, railways and pipelines, the freight costs have reduced but are still much higher than marine shipping. The freight volume is limited. China has developed rail links with Europe through Central Asia and Russia and would keep such links even if the rail freight is not cost effective enough as they may provide alternatives if marine shipping is cut off by powerful US navy.

Even if China has a relatively strong navy to protect its shipping through the Indian Ocean, the Malacca Strait will be a bottleneck difficult to pass if it is blocked by US military stationed in Singapore.

That is why Hambantota Port is so important. If China can bypass the strait, the port will become the major transport hub as important as Singapore for China’s shipping to its west now.

That is why China is building a railway through Laos to Thailand while Thailand is building a railway linking the railway in Laos to Malaysia. Malaysia has to build its East Coast Rail Link to its port on its western coast. Such a pan-Asia railway will enable not only China but also quite a few Indochinese countries to bypass the Malacca Strait.

The article mentioned the reduction of cost by China for the construction of the East Coast Rail Link though I have mentioned that as China is building a port at Kyaukpyu, Myanmar and the establishment of China-Myanmar Economic Corridor will make the construction of a railway linking Kyaukpyu and China possible. That will give China a much better shortcut to the Indian Ocean without going through the Malacca.

A pipeline from Pyaukpyu to China has already been built and in operation for more than 3 years as a shortcut for shipping of oil to China.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on Stratfor’s article, full text of which can be viewed at https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/casting-eye-belt-and-road-initiative-china-infrastructure.


China’s Navy: Armed with Six Aircraft Carriers and Stealth Fighters?


Image: Chinese Internet.

Now that the J-20 is joining Beijing’s carrier fleet, it seems possible.

by David Axe August 28, 2019

Follow @daxe on Twitter

The Chinese military has decided to develop the air force’s J-20 stealth fighter into a sea-based variant to fly from the navy’s growing fleet of aircraft carriers.

The Central Military Commission, the People’s Liberation Army’s top decision-making body, favors the J-20 over the smaller FC-31 stealth fighter design, according to the Hong Kong South China Morning Post.

The Chengdu Aerospace Corporation, which builds the J-20 for the air force, “will announce some new products, which will include a new version of their J-20,” an unnamed source told the newspaper. “You can guess what type it will be.”

If the selection of the J-20 is confirmed it will mark the end of a lengthy debate between its supporters and advocates of the FC-31 as to which would make a better carrier-based fighter.

Those who favored the J-20 said it was more advanced and reliable than the FC-31, but its supporters said it was more light and nimble.

Both the J-20 and FC-31 have their advantages. The size of the J-20 is similar to the J-15 since both are powerful heavy fighters,” Song Zhongping, a military commentator for Hong Kong-based Phoenix Television, said.

The carrier-based J-20 partially would replace the J-15, China’s first carrier fighter.

The J-15 is a clone of Russia’s Su-33 naval fighter. Outwardly, the fighter has a lot in common with U.S., French and British carrier planes. “The J-15 has folding wings, strengthened landing gear, a tailhook under a shortened tail stinger, two-piece slotted flaps, canards and a retractable inflight-refueling probe on the left side of the nose,” the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency explained in a January 2019 report.

The non-stealthy J-15 weighs 17 tons while empty and can launch via the ramp on the bow of China’s first two carriers, which lack catapults. But the ramp-launch method limits the J-15 to around 30 tons maximum weight, translating into a modest weapons load. The J-15 reportedly also is unreliable and accident-prone.

The J-20, which weighs 21 tons without fuel and weapons and up to 40 tons with them, likely will require a catapult for launch.

The U.S. Navy’s carriers use steam catapults to launch aircraft weighing as much as 50 tons. The Chinese navy could commission its first catapult-equipped aircraft carrier in 2022, according to the May 2019 edition of the U.S. Defense Department’s annual report on Chinese military developments.

China began construction of its second domestically built aircraft carrier in 2018, which will likely be larger and fitted with a catapult launch system,” the DIA noted. “This design will enable it to support additional fighter aircraft, fixed-wing early-warning aircraft, and more rapid flight operations. China’s second domestically built carrier is projected to be operational by 2022.”

The older flattops Liaoning and Shandong should remain useful even after the second domestic carrier — China’s third flattop — enters service. “Though Liaoning has substantially less capability than a U.S. Navy carrier, it provides extended air-defense coverage for at-sea task groups and is being used to develop further China’s carrier pilots, deck crews and tactics,” the Pentagon noted in the 2018 edition of its annual report on the Chinese military.

Still, China’s first two flattops probably won’t venture too far from home, the DIA predicted. “The primary purpose of this first domestic aircraft carrier will be to serve a regional defense mis­sion,” the intelligence agency claimed. “Beijing probably also will use the carrier to project power throughout the South China Sea and possibly into the Indian Ocean.”

The Chinese navy could possess as many as six aircraft carriers by the mid-2030s, experts told state media. As many as four could have catapults.

Song Zhongping, a military expert and T.V. commentator, told Global Times that China needs at least five aircraft carriers to execute its military strategy. Wang Yunfei, a retired Chinese navy officer, said Beijing needs six flattops.

Six carriers might allow Beijing to equip each of its regional fleets with two flattops. One vessel could deploy while the other underwent maintenance.

If Chengdu does develop a carrier-based J-20, the Chinese navy eventually could operate a mixed carrier fleet including two small flattops with J-15s and as many as four bigger vessels with J-20s.

David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is the author of the graphic novels War Fix,War Is Boring and Machete Squad.

Source: National Interest “China’s Navy: Armed with Six Aircraft Carriers and Stealth Fighters?”

Note: This is National Interest’s article I post here for readers’ information. It does not mean that I agree or disagree with the article’s views.


How Quantum Radar Could Completely Change Warfare


You’ve heard of stealth aircraft—now meet stealth radar.

By Kyle Mizokami

Aug 26, 2019

quantum radar Vladimir GerdoGetty Images

Quantum radar, for decades merely a concept, was recently demonstrated at science institute in Austria.

Quantum radars can provide much more detailed information about their targets without giving away their position.

Contrary to claims, quantum radars do not make stealth obsolete.

A new high definition radar system that could change the nature of warfare has been demonstrated for the first time. The result, quantum radar, is a high definition detection system that provides a much more detailed image of targets while itself remaining difficult to detect. Quantum radars could provide users with enough detail to identify aircraft, missiles, and other aerial targets by specific model.

According to the MIT Technology Review, researchers at Austria’s Institute of Science and Technology used entangled microwaves to create the world’s first quantum radar system.

Under a principle known as quantum entanglement, two particles can be linked together regardless of distance. When something happens to one particle it can be noticed in the other particle, forming what scientists call a quantum entangled pair. This in turn leads to a process called quantum illumination, where information about one particle’s environment can be inferred by studying the other particle.

Quantum radars involve pairing photon particles together, shooting one downrange while keeping the second captive for observation. The downrange particle will act in a certain manner as it bounces off certain objects, behavior that can be observed in the captive particle. The result is much more detailed information about the target than seen in previous radars.

Today’s radars can detect targets very well, but provide little detail. Radars can detect an object and note its altitude, bearing, and distance, but otherwise the target is a big, featureless blob. Air defenders must rely on other things, such identifying radar and other electromagnetic signals emanating from the target, to discern whether the blob is an enemy fighter, bomber, or even a commercial civilian aircraft.

Quantum radars, on the other hand, could provide enough detail for radar systems to identify the object based on physical characteristics. A Su-35 Flanker-E fighter, for example, could be identified by the sweep of its wings, the shape of its nose, and the number of engines.

[editoriallinks id=’dba514e3-01e9-4aba-80d6-ad1cc3e9789b’][/editoriallinks]

Another benefit of quantum radars: they emit very little energy and are thus difficult to detect. All contemporary radars emit electromagnetic radiation to detect objects. This radiation, while detectable, also makes the radar itself detectable. It’s a lot like having lots of people holding flashlights in a dark room: turning on your flashlight allows you to find other people but the flashlight beam leads straight back to you, giving away your presence and location.

A lack of detectability offers a distinct tactical advantage in warfare. A friendly quantum radar could detect a flight of enemy aircraft without revealing its own presence. This could cause the enemy warplanes to put off defensively jamming local radars and radio signals—which itself is noticeable to the defenders. Their guard down, they could then be ambushed by friendly air defense missiles and fighters waiting for them.

Quantum radars has been billed as a means for detecting stealth aircraft, with claims that it renders efforts to make aircraft invisible to radar useless. According to three experts polled by Engineering and Technology, anti-stealth claims are a “gross oversimplication” and the main advantage of quantum radar is the high definition aspect.

Source: MIT Technology Review


Hull of China’s 075 Landing Helicopter Dock Nearing Completion


China’s first Type 075 amphibious helicopter assault ship (Picture source: Chinese Internet)

China’s first Type 075 amphibious helicopter assault ship suggests the vessel may be completed in the next few months (Picture Source: Mike Yeo)

Navy Recognition says in its report “China’s First Helicopter Carrier Type 075 Nearing Completion” on August 27 that the hull of China’s first Type 075 landing helicopter dock is nealy completed and is expected to be launched early next year according to a photo on the internet.

The ship has an estimated displacement of 30,000 to 40,000 tons able to hold up to 28 helicopters and land 6 simultaneously on its deck according to the report.

The report says that three of such ships are in order. Those ships will greatly strengthen China’s amphibious force.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on Navy Recongnition’s report, full text of which can be viewed at https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2019/august/7431-china-s-first-helicopter-carrier-type-075-nearing-completion.html.


Trade War Cannot Reduce US Trade Deficit but Helps China Grow Stronger


An article on The Hill yesterday titled “Trump already has won the trade war with China” says Trump has already been able to get 90% of what he wants in his trade war with China. However, he would not stop and keeps on tariff rises to hurt US and world economy.

The article lists what trump has or would have got from China if he simply accepted Chinese commitments in the trade negotiations, such as reduction of US trade deficit by Chinese purchase of lots of US energy and agricultural products, protection of intellectual property, prevention of forced transfer of technology, end of government subsidies to industries, ensure of fair treatment for US entities, etc.

What is Trump’s strategic goal?

The article says, “In the U.S., President Trump appears to be holding out for a starkly decisive outcome — equivalent to China’s unconditional surrender — to maximize his political standing for winning re-election in 2020.”

Trump’s problem is his failure to see China’s strategic goal. China would not surrender as it wants Trump to keep on US pressure to facilitate China’s further reform and opening up for transformation from export- and investment-geared growth to innovation-, creation- and consumption-led growth.

Such transformation certainly will slow down China’s economy. US trade war only quickens the transformation while worsen the slowdown. However, such slowdown is but short-term. In the long run the transformation will enable China to achieve better growth later.

To keep exports to the US, China has to move its labor intensive export-oriented enterprises to its neighbors where labor costs are lower.

China has been helping Sri Lanka train workers for employment in Sri Lanka’s vast special economic zone near Hambantota to enable China to move such enterprises to the zone. The port China is building there will facilitate the exports.

Similar zones are being established in Bangladesh and Myanmar since China signed memorandums of understanding with them on the establishment of China-Bangladesh Economic Corridor and China-Myanmar Economic Corridor last year.

China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is being built and there are also such zones for China to move such enterprises there.

The construction of infrastructures of power stations, roads, railways and ports in those countries under China’s Belt and Road initiative will facilitate such movements.

US tariff hikes will only quicken such movements to avoid the hikes. China will only have the problem of substantial unemployment due to the movements, but the unemployed will blame US tariff hikes instead Xi Jinping’s economic transformation.

On the other hand, Chinese enterprises in those countries will make greater profits due to reduction of labor costs and have greater competitive edge in US market in exporting their products to the United States. As US enterprises cannot compete with them due to much higher labor costs, the US has to keep on importing the products. Its trade deficit will increase instead of decrease. However, China is not to blame as the deficit of trade with China has been switched to that of trade with China’s neighbors.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on The Hill’s article, full text of which can be viewed at https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/458846-trump-already-has-won-the-trade-war-with-china


New Chinese Surveillance Ships to Detect Submarines


The type 927 (number 782) closely resembles U.S. ocean surveillance ships (Picture source: Chinese internet)

Navyreconginition.com says in its report “Three types of 927 surveillance ships entered China navy in 2018 and 2019” yesterday that according to photos circulated on Chinese internet over the past week, a new Chinese ocean surveillance ship has been completed and commissioned in southern China.

It says other two such surveillance ships are being built in Chinese shipyard. They are allo of SWATH designs extemely quiet especially when outfitted with electric motors. They are“especially useful for hydrographic surveying and research utilizing sonar and other sensitive acoustic equipment, and for locating submarines.”

They resemble U.S. Navy Ocean Surveillance Ships and may be equipped with advanced sonar arrays to detect and track submarines at great ranges. “Some can augment their passive listening arrays with low-frequency active arrays that send sound waves into the water to bounce off submerged submarine hulls to reveal their location,” says the report.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on navyrecognition.com’s report, full text of which can be viewed at https://navyrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis/naval-technology/7426-three-types-of-927-surveillance-ship-entered-china-navy-in-2018-and-2019.html.


China’s Very Own B-2 Stealth Bomber? Meet the H-20 Stealth Bomber


Scared yet?

by Sebastien Roblin August 25, 2019

According to a study by Rick Joe at The Diplomat, Chinese publications began speculating about the H-20 in the early 2010s. Postulated characteristics include four non-afterburning WS-10A Taihang turbofans sunk into the top of the wing surface with S-shaped saw-toothed inlets for stealth. It’s worth noting that the WS-10 has been plagued by major problems, but that hasn’t stopped China from manufacturing fighters using WS-10s, with predictably troubled results.

In October 2018, Chinese media announced that the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) would publicly unveil its new H-20 stealth bomber during a parade celebrating the air arm’s seventieth anniversary in 2019.

(This first appeared several months ago.)

Prior news of the H-20’s development had been teased using techniques pioneered by viral marketing campaigns for Hollywood movies. For example, the Xi’an Aviation Industrial Corporation released a promotional video in May 2018 pointedly imitating Northrop Grumman’s own Superbowl ad for the B-21 stealth bomber, portraying a shrouded flying wing bomber in its final seconds. Later, the silhouette of a possible new bomber appeared at a PLAAF gala. This comes only two years after PLAAF Gen. Ma Xiaotian formally revealed the Hong-20’s existence.

If the H-20 does have the range and passable stealth characteristics attributed to it, it could alter the strategic calculus between the United States and China by exposing U.S. bases and fleets across the Pacific to surprise air attacks.

Only three countries have both the imperative and the resources to develop huge strategic bombers that can strike targets across the globe: the United States, Russia and China. Strategic bombers make sense for China because Beijing perceives dominance of the western half of the Pacific Ocean as essential for its security due to its history of maritime invasion, and the challenge posed by the United States in particular. The two superpowers are separated by five to six thousand miles of ocean—and the United States has spent the last century developing a network of island territories such as Guam, foreign military bases in East Asia and super-carriers with which it can project air and sea power across that span.

Xi’an Aviation, the H-20’s manufacturer, also builds China’s H-6 strategic jet bombers, a knockoff the 1950s-era Soviet Tu-16 Badger which has recently been upgraded with modern avionics, aerial refueling capability and cruise missiles in the later H-6K and H-6J models. Beijing could easily have produced a successor in a similar vein, basically a giant four-engine airliner-sized cargo plane loaded with fuel and long-range missiles that’s never intended to get close enough for adversaries to shoot back.

Alternately, analyst Andreas Rupprecht reported that China considered developing a late-Cold War style supersonic bomber akin to the U.S. B-1 or Russian Tu-160 called the JH-XX. This would have lugged huge bombloads at high speed and low altitude, while exhibiting partial stealth characteristics for a marginal improvement in survivability. However, such an approach was already considered excessively vulnerable to modern fighters and air defense by the late twentieth century. A Chinese magazine cover sported a concept image of the JH-XX in 2013, but the project appears to have been set aside for now.

Instead, in the PLAAF elected to pursue a more ambitious approach: a slower but far stealthier flying wing like the U.S. B-2 and forthcoming B-21 Raider. A particular advantage of large flying wings is they are less susceptible to detection by low-bandwidth radar, such as those on the Navy’s E-2 Hawkeye radar planes, which are effective at detecting the approach of smaller stealth fighters.

While China’s development of stealth aircraft technology in the J-20 and J-31 stealth fighter was an obvious prerequisite for the H-20 project, so apparently was Xi’an’s development of the hulking Y-20 ‘Chubby Girl’ cargo plane, which established the company’s capability to build large, long-range aircraft using modern computer-aided design and manufacturing techniques—precision technology essential for mass producing the exterior surfaces of stealth aircraft.

According to a study by Rick Joe at The Diplomat, Chinese publications began speculating about the H-20 in the early 2010s. Postulated characteristics include four non-afterburning WS-10A Taihang turbofans sunk into the top of the wing surface with S-shaped saw-toothed inlets for stealth. It’s worth noting that the WS-10 has been plagued by major problems, but that hasn’t stopped China from manufacturing fighters using WS-10s, with predictably troubled results.

The new strategic bomber is expected to have a maximum un-refueled combat radius exceeding 5,000 miles and payload between the H-6’s ten tons and the B-2’s twenty-three tons. This is because the H-20 is reportedly designed to strike targets beyond the “second island ring” (which includes U.S. bases in Japan, Guam, the Philippines, etc.) from bases on mainland China. The third island chain extends to Hawaii and coastal Australia.

In a U.S.-China conflict, the best method for neutralizing U.S. air power would be to destroy it on the ground (or carrier deck), especially in the opening hours of a war. While ballistic missiles and H-6 bombers can already contribute to this with long-range missiles, these are susceptible to detection and interception given adequate forewarning. A stealth bomber could approach much closer to carrier task forces and air bases before releasing its weapons, giving defenses too little time to react. An initial strike might in fact focus on air defense radars, “opening the breach” for a follow up wave of less stealthy attacks.

The H-20 will also likely be capable of carrying nuclear weapons, finally giving China a full triad of nuclear-capable submarines, ballistic missiles and bombers. Though the H-6 was China’s original nuclear bomber, these are no longer configured for nuclear strike, though that could change if air-launched nuclear-tipped cruise or ballistic missile are devised. Beijing is nervous that the United States’ limited ballistic missile defense capabilities might eventually become adequate for countering China’s small ICBM and SLBM arsenal. The addition of a stealth bomber would contribute to China’s nuclear deterrence by adding a new, difficult-to-stop vector of nuclear attack that the U.S. defenses aren’t designed to protect against.

Some Chinese publications also argue that the H-20 will do double-duty as a networked reconnaissance and command & control platform similar to U.S. F-35 stealth fighters. This would make sense, as China has developed a diverse arsenal of long-range air-, ground- and sea-launched missiles, but doesn’t necessarily have a robust reconnaissance network to form a kill-chain cueing these missiles to distant targets. Theoretically, an H-20 could rove ahead, spying the position of opposing sea-based assets using a low-probability-of-intercept AESA radar, and fuse that information to a firing platform hundreds or even thousands of miles away. The H-20 could also be used for electronic warfare or to deploy specialized directed energy.

The crescendo of publicity surrounding the H-20 indicates the PLAAF believes the plane will soon be ready enough to show to the public—and international audiences. Once revealed, analysts will pour over the aircraft’s geometry to estimate just how the stealthy it really is, looking for radar-reflective Achilles’ heels such as exposed engine inlets and indiscrete tail stabilizers. However, external analysis cannot provide a full assessment, because the quality of the radar-absorbent materials applied to surfaces, and the finesse of the manufacturing (avoiding seams, protruding screws, etc.) has a major impact on radar cross-section.

It is worth bearing in mind, however, that an H-20 seeking to slip through the gauntlet of long-range search radars scattered across the Pacific to launch CJ-10K cruise missiles with a range of over nine hundred miles would not require the same degree of stealth as an F-35 intended to penetrate more densely defended airspace and launch small diameter bombs with a range of 70 miles.

Analysts forecast the H-20’s first flight in the early 2020s, with production possibly beginning around 2025. If the H-20 is judged to be of credible design, the Pentagon in turn will have to factor the strategic implications of China’s stealth capabilities, and will likely seek to field implement counter-stealth technologies which formerly have been mostly vaunted by Russia and China. The publicity which the often-secretive Chinese government is according the H-20 also indicates Beijing’s hope the bomber will serve as a strategic deterrent to foreign adversaries—even before its first flight.

Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in Conflict Resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring.

Source: National Interest “China’s Very Own B-2 Stealth Bomber? Meet the H-20 Stealth Bomber”

Note: This is National Interest’s article I post here for readers’ information. It does not mean that I agree or disagree with the article’s views.