F-22... Bomber and it's possible abilities

I receive an AIAA email daily and this was one of the subjects:

Lockheed Martin envisions a bomber version of the F/A-22 Raptor and is working to develop the plane's electronic attack capabilities. Executives said some Raptors will have air-to-ground radar systems and better attack capabilities against air defense systems

Note the last part of the paragraph: better attack capabilities against air defense systems... HOW?

Along with better electronic attack capabilities, I would think a F-22 bomber.... i guess B-22... would have to be faster than the F-22 in order to be "better" and suit the role of a supercruise bomber.

I would also think the plane would have to have a larger load capacity and in effect be less maneuverable hence the need for a higher top cruising speed.

There are more variables, but the basic concept is there.

What other possibilities are there for a F-22 Bomber variant... maybe it's just a lockheed dream, and not likely a reality.

The FB-22 is a very real possibility.
The "better attack capabilities against air defense systems " you referred to is probably a reference to it's AESA HPM capabilities.

Here are a few threads on ATS to give you more insight and info into Lockheed's FB-22 regional bomber concept.

The Skunk Works New Proposal: FB-22 with Active Visual Stealth!
The Raptor as a Bomber
F/B-22 with electrochromatic panels?



Here's something about the X-44 Manta - a concept proposal for the FB-22...
has anybody heard of the X-44 MANTA?

...and here's more on other future bomber concepts...
new bombers

...and finally, here is a thread on the FB-22's main competition, the Northrop-Grumman FB-23...
FB-23 concept confirmed

The F/B-22 would be a good bomber, but If we were to have an interium bomber, I would prefer the "damn good lookin" F/B-23.

F/B-22



F/B-23

Yeah, this is a bit of old news...

I'm hoping for a bigger, longer ranged, faster (IntelGurl, was it you who mentioned a proposed scramjet engine?), larger payload, two seat version of the Black Widow II.

In any case, I really like the idea of having a super stealthy supercruising strike aircraft for time-sensitive heavilly defended targets in the initial faze of an operation. It is a capability that the USAF should have already. In addition, I'd like to see a UCAV designed that can keep up with it which could be controled by the extra pilot. Fly 1 FB-22/23 along with 1 or 2 UCAVs for support, let the UCAV fly in first and expose any air defences while also providing extra bombing or air combat support.

i guess that some people are exagerating...

better anti sams???, well put them HARMs and new software

is like to say "better anti naval", then put harpoons and othe software

big deal...

[edit on 2-12-2005 by grunt2]

Originally posted by grunt2
i guess that some people are exagerating...

better anti sams???, well put them HARMs and new software

is like to say "better anti naval", then put harpoons and othe software

They are going to be made bigger, which will allow for a longer range and larger payload.

The are going to be made more stealthy, with lower thermal signatures because TVC will not be used and thus the exhaust can be buried deep in the airframe, along with refinement of the physical shape because extreme manueverability will not be needed, and there may even be an active visual stealth system.

here is something

MARIETTA, Ga. - Lockheed Martin Corp. is working to further develop the F/A-22 Raptor's electronic attack (EA) capability, such as against improvised explosives devices (IEDs), and continues to envision a bomber version of the aircraft, executives told The DAILY and other reporters Nov. 28.

As for a stealthy bomber version, one executive said Lockheed Martin envisions a larger variant capable of delivering 100,000 pounds of ordnance. The variant would benefit from several existing attack-fighter innovations, including payload doors that open, launch ordnance and close all within 1.5 seconds, minimizing the aircraft's radar signature.

100,000 pounds?

Lockheed Martin Cites Bomber, Anti-IED Raptor



[edit on 2-12-2005 by chinawhite]

I gotta agree with CW here...

100,000 pounds?!?!?!?!?!

the scary thing is the source is quite reliable.

Originally posted by chinawhite
the scary thing is the source is quite reliable.

HOLY CRAP CHINA! I am finally pleased with ONE posting of yours!

Congrads Keep it up! I have high hopes for you... you've got potential kid.

[edit on 2-12-2005 by rmatrem]

Originally posted by chinawhite
the scary thing is the source is quite reliable.

That has to be a typo...Right?

I mean, thats 200 of the small diameter 500 pound bombs. The B-2 can only carry 40 of them if I remember correctly.

Am I right in thinking the bombload of the B-52 is 80,000 lbs (give or take a few pounds)? You would think it was a typo for 10,000lbs maybe but then that figure is then too low as that is only as much as a Jaguar carries.

I would have guessed a more likely payload for the FB-22 would be around 20-24,000lbs unless it is very much bigger than the F-22

thinks or does that 100,000 include all fuel, ammunition, the pilot, indeed everything that isn't actually bolted to the plane

[edit on 2-12-2005 by waynos]

AMM, there are some weapons that are redesigned to "fit" in the f22, so i dont see the problem, desing harms for the 22s,we are talking about the f22, not the fb22 that still is a project

Do you mean you don't see the problem with a fighter sized aircraft lifting 100,000lbs ordnance?

You do realise that no other aircraft that size has ever carried more than 20,000lb and the norm is 10-15,000lb right?

I know the FB-22 is a major advance in technology and all that but a 100,000lb load is a HUGE leap in lifting capability, are the aerodynics really going to deliver that when they are already compromised for stealth characteristics? Look at teh F-117, it carries exactly 2 bombs, now the FB-22 (AND 23) are sure going to be massively better than that but I am just showing how you have to compromise pure aerodynamics to impart stealth characteristics, and only pure aerodynamics and lotsd of power are going to benefit the payload to THAT degree, IMHO.

waynos im not talking about it, im not talking about the fb22, the open post is about to improve the f22 to AG attacks, not about that dream of the fb22

I presume, rightly or wrongly, that any bomber variant of the F-22 will thus be the FB-22, even if thats not the case (though I can't see how not) the question still remains, 100,000lb is A LOT for a fighter to lift.

i agree, but man im not talking about the fb22

one thing is the f22 with improved AG attack, and other thing is the fb22 dream

[edit on 3-12-2005 by grunt2]

I give up, the original question has been lost anyway. Yeah, its not an FB-22 its an F-22 bomber.

is like to say that late f4s phantoms have better bombing capacity than the original ones, that make them a new plane??

or the new f16 have better AA capacity than the old ones, that make them a new plane??

or the new f15s have strike capacity, that make them a new plane???

or.....well, you have the idea

Originally posted by grunt2
is like to say that late f4s phantoms have better bombing capacity than the original ones, that make them a new plane??

or the new f16 have better AA capacity than the old ones, that make them a new plane??

or the new f15s have strike capacity, that make them a new plane???

or.....well, you have the idea

are you serious grunt2

The FB-22 will not be an f-22 with upgraded ground attack, but will be a new plane based on the f-22, it will share many of the same charecteristics of the f-22 but will have all sorts of changes to make it better as an attack plane.