Global Aircraft Forum Help -  Privacy Policy -  Interactive Content Guidelines -  Legal Notices
Global Aircraft Welcome, Guest!   [Log In]  |   [Sign Up]  |   [Return Home]  

GAC Forum

RSS Feed Message Directories
Create New Topic
   RSS Feed Military Chat
   RSS Feed Subject - Fact or Fiction: FB-22  [Topic ID# 101]Messages 1 - 8 of 8  

Ross
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 751
Message Number 1
Date Posted: 17 July 2005, 8:14:55 PM

Does the FB-22 really exist?



ussconstitution
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 758
Message Number 2
Date Posted: 18 July 2005, 11:06:57 AM

What is the FB-22? Is it a F-22 upgrade or is it a totally new aircraft?
From 1914 since, airpower has become essential for any field of battle. To Vietnam, to Desert Storm airpower has become dominate in the battlefield. May airpower live on in times of war!



Ross
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 760
Message Number 3
Date Posted: 18 July 2005, 8:02:58 PM

Ive heard it is a totally new delta wing design for the f-22, but i am not sure if it is only a rumor, ive heard it is supposed to be able ro carry more ordinance and replace the b-1b, b-2, and the b-52H



f_14_tomcat
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 763
Message Number 4
Date Posted: 19 July 2005, 7:42:24 PM

it is real i think, umm ive seen it appear in many places and it is kind of the same idea as the f-16xl, its a ground attack version of an extremely good fighter



ussconstitution
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 768
Message Number 5
Date Posted: 20 July 2005, 12:37:33 AM

This description is from the Global Security Website
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/fb-22.htm

FB-22 Fighter Bomber
The FB-22 is a concept on the shelf for future consideration. It will actually cost some money to develop the FB-22 and right now it's a concept. It's a concept that helps stretch minds. Air Force Secretary James G. Roche is the father of this concept and he has a model of this concept on his desk. It looks very much like an F-22. It takes advantage of all of the development work that has been done on the F/A-22. It is two seats. It is a bit larger. It retains all of its super cruise characteristics. It is not quite as high G as the F/A-22 but it is still a maneuverable airplane. And where the F/A-22 will carry eight small diameter bombs internally, the FB-22 would carry 30 small diameter bombs internally with a range approximately two and a half times that of the F/A-22.

In early 2002 Lockheed Martin began briefing the Air Force on a modified bomber version of the F-22 Raptor fighter, featuring a delta wing, longer body and greater range and payload. This company-funded study of the FB-22, conducted during 2002, was an internally generated, internally funded proprietary study into the feasibility of making a derivative of the F-22. The FB-22 medium bomber is based on existing and planned capabilities of the Lockheed Martin F-22 fighter, a heritage that would limit development costs should the idea go into production. The medium bomber version of the F-22 would provide a relatively low cost and low risk approach for development of a high speed strike aircraft to carry a sufficient load to attack mobile targets.

In a series or articles by Bill Sweetman for 'Jane's Defense Weekly' and 'Popular Science,' the FB-22 s described as a tailless delta variant of the F-22. Yaw control would be provided by split flaps, or 'decelerons' on the wings, while roll would be controlled by movable wingtips.

In a bomber version, the fuselage would be longer and the wings far larger to give the bomber greater range – more than 1,600 miles, compared with the F-22's 600-plus – and bomb-carrying capacity. The FB-22 would replace the Air Force's F-15E and take over some missions for long-range bombers such as the B-2 and B-1. The initial design envisioned a plane that could carry 24 Small Diameter Bombs, which weigh only 250 pounds. Using Global Positioning System guidance, the small bomb would be as lethal as a 2,000-pound bomb. A regular F/A-22 would carry eight Small Diameter Bombs. An FB-22 would carry 30.

The biggest difference between the F-22 and the FB-22 is the wing, which would be very close to a delta wing. It is not exactly a delta, but a much bigger wing, which would increase the amount of space that could carry bombs. The longer, thicker delta wing would enable the FB-22 to carry up to 80 percent more fuel than the F-22, giving it a correspondingly greater range.

To produce an FB-22, the basic F-22 would need airframe modifications for a larger weapons payload and greater fuel capacity, bringing the maximum takeoff weight to over 42 tons. The FB-22's fuselage would need to be about 10 feet longer than that of the F-22 to make room for a larger weapons bay. The FB-22 might dispense with the F-22's twin horizontal stabilizers and vertical tails. If so, the the plane's overall length wouldn't be much different from the F-22's. Like the B-2, the FB-22 would carry two pilots, since missions could last more than 12 hours.

Rather than using the F-22's Pratt & Whitney F119 engines, the FB-22 is likely to have either the new F135, which was developed from the F119 to power the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, or the rival General Electric F136. In either event, the FB-22 would have greater speed than the B-1B, the fastest US bomber.

Because of the work already done on the F-22, developing the FB-22 might cost about $5 billion to $7 billion – a fraction of the price for starting a bomber from scratch. FB-22 flights could begin by 2013. Starting a second final assembly line for the FB-22 at Boeing is under consideration, since Boeing makes the F-22's wings.
TEXTTEXT
From 1914 since, airpower has become essential for any field of battle. To Vietnam, to Desert Storm airpower has become dominate in the battlefield. May airpower live on in times of war!



trigun5
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 771
Message Number 6
Date Posted: 25 July 2005, 12:07:35 AM

I have read an article about it. I don't think it supposed to replace any aircraft. But it is a bomber design created using the original FA22 design. It is supposed to carry more ammo than its cousin, the FA22, but I don't think it will be built as big as the buff, b1 or b2. I don't think that you can just replace something that works as good as those aircraft do. However, since there are rumors of the FA-22 program possible getting scrapped, the article stated that idea for the FB-22 would also be scrapped. It is supposed to carry multiple hardpoints as well as the weapons bays it already has. Once I found out some more info I will post it.
James Porter



Ross
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 774
Message Number 7
Date Posted: 25 July 2005, 9:10:20 PM

The f/a-22 program is definately not getting scrapped because as of this year the f/a-22 is to begin to enter the air fleet.



blackone
Subject: Fact or Fiction: FB-22
Post ID# 785
Message Number 8
Date Posted: 06 August 2005, 9:38:47 AM

The FB-22 is a proposed United States Air Force (USAF) bomber aircraft, derived from the F/A-22 and intended to fulfill a USAF requirement of an interim bomber to replace the B-1B Lancer. It would precede a next-generation strike aircraft entering service after 2037. Secretary of the Air Force James Roche is said to be one of its strongest proponents.

The FB-22 differs from the original F/A-22 design significantly. A lengthened fuselage provides greater fuel capacity and a much larger internal weapons bay, better suiting long range attack missions. The elongated delta wing and deletion of tailplanes coupled with a possible change to the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 engines would allow for a higher top-speed, sacrificing some maneuverability for better bombing performance. Unlike the similarly appearing X-44 MANTA, the FB-22 would rely on wing control surfaces and likely have fixed engine nozzles

got all of this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB-22


   of 1 pages )  


Search the forum:



You must be logged in to post on this forum! Please Log in now




Global Aircraft Forum and faces are
Copyright © 2025 The Global Aircraft Organization

GAC Forum v.1,7,2