FB-22 and FB-23: The Air Force's Less Traveled Paths
Developing a modern combat vehicle is a lengthy, complex, and expensive process. It's no surprise that when design bureaus and defense industry enterprises succeed in creating a successful product, various modifications are developed based on it, designed to address specific challenges.
Considering the cost of modern combat aircraft, aviation This applies first and foremost, for example, to the MiG-27 frontline bomber, which was created on the basis of the MiG-23 fighter, and the Su-24MR tactical reconnaissance aircraft was created on the basis of the Su-24 frontline bomber.
MiG-23 and MiG-27 (top), Su-24 and Su-24MR (bottom)
Many more modifications were created on the basis of the fourth-generation Su-27 interceptor fighter - this includes the two-seat version of the Su-30, which received numerous export versions, including the famous Indian Su-30MKI, this is the Su-34 frontline fighter-bomber, the carrier-based Su-33, the 4++ generation modification Su-35S, and there were also many experimental machines that did not go into production, for example, the Su-27KUB / Su-33UB.
Su-27SM3 and Su-35S (top), Su-34 and Su-27KUB/Su-33UB (bottom)
What about the potential enemy?
Regarding the fourth-generation F-15, F-16, and F-18 fighters, these aircraft have also received numerous modifications, but the fifth-generation F-22A Raptor hasn't had much success with modifications. Of course, the same can be said about our Su-57 multirole fighter, but that aircraft appeared much later than the F-22A, so it still has a long way to go.
However, at one time the F-22A also had the potential to become something more than just a fighter, but first things first.
In March 1999, the US Air Force published a white paper stating that the existing fleet of B-52, B-1, and B-2 strategic bombers would be sufficient until approximately 2037. However, this timeframe did not suit everyone in Congress and the US Air Force leadership, in particular, it was assumed that increasing the number and effectiveness of air defense assets (Defense) significantly increased the risk of destruction of any aircraft not equipped with stealth technology for potential adversaries.
As a solution to the problem, the possibility of creating a kind of medium-to-regional bomber, capable of partially taking over the functions of strategic bombers and possessing increased survivability on the battlefield, was considered. In particular, three projects were proposed by enterprises of the US military-industrial complex (MIC): the FB-22 from Lockheed Martin, the FB-23 from Northrop Grumman, and the B-1R from Rockwell.
In fact, the US Air Force decided to repeat the trick with the F-111 tactical bomber when they turned it into the "semi-strategic" bomber FB-111A, which was produced in a series of 76 aircraft (although the original plan was for 263 units).
Flight of a pair of FB-111As
FB-22
Lockheed Martin proposed the FB-22 bomber design in the early 2000s, and feasibility studies for the FB-22 as a whole began in 2001. The FB-22's primary mission was to penetrate enemy airspace, heavily covered by air defenses, to strike ground targets. At the same time, the FB-22 was to retain its anti-aircraft capability.
To achieve this, Lockheed Martin developed several concepts that included significant changes to the fuselage and wings while retaining much of the original F-22A's avionics.
In the first variant, designated FB-22-1, Lockheed Martin lengthened and widened the fuselage to accommodate larger internal weapons bays, while the overall aerodynamic design remained unchanged.
In subsequent iterations, designated FB-22-2, FB-22-3, and FB-22-4, the horizontal tailplane was removed, effectively converting the FB-22 into a tailless design. The developers also considered installing delta-diamond wings with varying sweep angles on the leading and trailing edges. The increased wingspan significantly increased the FB-22's range, both through increased lift and by accommodating additional fuel reserves in wing-mounted tanks.
The forward fuselage of all FB-22 variants was lengthened to accommodate a co-pilot/weapons operator. The F-22A and FB-22 were expected to share 80% of their avionics and software. According to some reports, not four, but six FB-22 variants were built, but reliable information about them is lacking.
The FB-22's internal weapons load was to be 6800 kilograms, and with weapons mounted on external pylons, 13,600 kilograms. Furthermore, the FB-22 was to be designed with stealthy, faceted external weapons containers mounted under the wing, specifically to accommodate large aerial bombs such as the GBU-37.
A B-2A bomber drops a GBU-37 bunker buster.
Compared to the original F-22A, the FB-22's combat radius was nearly tripled, from 1100 kilometers to over 3000 kilometers, and could be further increased by using external fuel tanks.
The primary flight mode was subsonic, although the presence of afterburners in the Pratt & Whitney F119 turbojet engines optimized for subsonic flight allowed for supersonic acceleration. The estimated maximum speed varied depending on the variant, from Mach 1,5 for the FB-22-4 with its maximum wing area to Mach 1,92 for the FB-22-2.
Image FB-22-4
For self-defense against enemy aircraft, the FB-22 was supposed to carry missiles AIM-9 Sidewinders and AIM-120 AMRAAM.
The regional bomber concept attracted the interest of not only Lockheed Martin, but also their competitor, Northrop Grumman, which had previously lost the competition for a fifth-generation stealth fighter with its YF-23 prototype.
FB-23
Northrop Grumman's FB-23 regional bomber likely had a lower chance than the FB-22, as it would have lost commonality and the US Air Force would have effectively had to create another fifth-generation aircraft. Don't get your hopes up, the YF-23 prototype is just that, a prototype, and far from a production model.
On the other hand, Northrop Grumman is the designer and supplier of the B-2 strategic bomber, so there was certainly a possibility that they could have pushed the FB-23 project through their channels.
Image FB-23
Northrop Grumman first proposed to the US Air Force to develop the FB-23 regional bomber based on the rejected F-23 fifth-generation aircraft design back in 2004. Incidentally, some argue that the choice of the F-22 was a mistake, that the F-23 had significantly greater potential, and that the US Air Force simply chose a more conservative design to minimize potential risks.
FB-23 mockup
There is also an opinion that the US government decided to support Lockheed Martin because Northrop Grumman had already received significant funds for the B-2 bomber program – this is quite in line with the US tradition of “not putting all your eggs in one basket,” supporting several manufacturers at once, ensuring their mutual competition.
A similar approach was also developed in the USSR, and abandoning it will not lead to anything good – the MiG company needs to be revived, for example, by purchasing at least a hundred MiG-35s, the creation of the advanced MiG-41 aircraft or the deeply modernized MiG-31.
Like the FB-22 project, the prospective FB-23 was to feature a two-seat cockpit. The overall outline and layout of the airframe would be the same as the original YF-23, but significantly larger – by almost a third, to 30 meters, compared to the original 20 meters of the YF-23. The operational range was to be approximately 3000 kilometers, with a payload of 4540 kilograms in internal compartments.
In general, it seems that the FB-23 was supposed to be much more different from the YF-23 than the FB-22 was supposed to be from the F-22A, becoming something like our Tu-22M3.
There are no other details about the FB-23 regional bomber; apparently, it was not developed in depth due to the low chances of the project being realized.
B-1R
We will mention the Rockwell B-1R regional bomber project in passing, since this machine is somewhat out of place in the topic under consideration.
If the FB-22 and FB-23 are a development of tactical combat aircraft, then the B-1R is an attempt to create a regional bomber based on the strategic B-1B, by converting it to the F119 Pratt & Whitney turbojet engine from the F-22 Raptor fighter, installing a radar with an active phased antenna array (AESA), introducing air-to-air missiles into its ammunition loadout, and expanding the range of weapons used.
It is obvious that such a machine would not have been cheaper, and most likely even more expensive, than the original B-1B strategic bomber, and would have inherited all of its operational problems, while there was no hope of any increase in survivability, so the B-1R project, apparently, was not even seriously considered.
It's not a good idea to try and turn a "strategist" into a tactical bomber.
The only thing worth noting is that even then they began to think about making the bombers more survivable, giving them the ability to work against air targets and equipping them with powerful radars with AESA.
Nowadays An AESA radar and air-to-air missiles will likely be included in the onboard weapons suite of the newest American strategic bomber, the B-21 Raider., which began to be created to replace the closed FB-22, FB-23 and B-1R programs.
The question arises: to what extent can combat vehicles of this format be in demand today?
The Sixth Generation
If you look at the publicly available information about sixth-generation aircraft, you can see that their dimensions may increase somewhat, at least when it comes to heavy twin-engine aircraft.
In particular, the US needs an aircraft capable of operating at great distances from its bases, in the Pacific theatre of military operations – of course, we understand that we are talking about the confrontation with China.
From a presentation of the American sixth-generation F-47 fighter jet
In turn, the PRC also understands that in the event of a conflict, they will have to attack American military bases located at great distances, so among the flying prototypes of sixth-generation aircraft, there are fairly large models, most likely capable of performing the tasks of "regional bombers."
The Chengdu J-36, powered by three turbojet engines, is one of the prototypes of China's sixth-generation aircraft development program, presumably designed for air superiority and ground and sea attack. Analysts speculate that the J-36 may be either a prototype sixth-generation fighter or a prototype regional bomber, formerly known as the JH-XX.
For reference, from the English-language Wikipedia:
"The US Air Force considers this aircraft a 'sixth-generation' air superiority fighter. Other divergent opinions suggest it could be a heavy fighter, fighter-bomber, interceptor, bomber, or strike aircraft, given its large size, extended cargo bay, and aerodynamic optimizations aimed at speed and range."
Analysts also cautioned that placing the J-36 within traditional semantics such as "bomber" may be an oversimplification that does not reflect the role and capabilities the J-36 will represent in the context of future air warfare and strategy.
Bill Sweetman, writing for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, has suggested that the J-36 could serve as a supersonic launch platform for long-range missiles and a command and control center for other manned and unmanned aircraft, and that the overall size and performance of the J-36 should be classified into a new category of aircraft he calls the "air cruiser" (recall the material What is the B-21 Raider: from the B-52 stealth to the “flying destroyer”).
Justin Bronk of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) suggested that large manned aircraft could offer unique strategic advantages to China and the US in the Indo-Pacific region, which has limited forward bases and growing missile threats. drones and electronic warfare equipment (EW) "
Analysts also cautioned that placing the J-36 within traditional semantics such as "bomber" may be an oversimplification that does not reflect the role and capabilities the J-36 will represent in the context of future air warfare and strategy.
Bill Sweetman, writing for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, has suggested that the J-36 could serve as a supersonic launch platform for long-range missiles and a command and control center for other manned and unmanned aircraft, and that the overall size and performance of the J-36 should be classified into a new category of aircraft he calls the "air cruiser" (recall the material What is the B-21 Raider: from the B-52 stealth to the “flying destroyer”).
Justin Bronk of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) suggested that large manned aircraft could offer unique strategic advantages to China and the US in the Indo-Pacific region, which has limited forward bases and growing missile threats. drones and electronic warfare equipment (EW) "
The increase in size may be due not only to the need for increased range but also to increase the ammunition capacity in the internal compartments. The problem with modern fifth-generation stealth aircraft is that, in stealth mode, they carry three to four times fewer air-to-air missiles than their fourth-generation predecessors, not to mention air-to-surface munitions.
Of course, you can use external hardpoints, but then visibility increases dramatically, and with the “faceted” underwing containers for weapons, apparently, things didn’t work out.
Conclusions
As we can see, if the US had decided to implement the FB-22 or FB-23 programs at the time, they could have received a rather interesting aircraft, in many ways superior to “classic” fifth-generation fighters in a number of scenarios.
In some ways, the FB-22 or FB-23 could even have the expected capabilities of promising sixth-generation combat vehicles – after all, a large flight radius and a spacious weapons bay (bays) have now proven to be in demand, that is, everything that could have been implemented in the FB-22 or FB-23 ten years ago.
The FB-23 concept is very impressive, at least subjectively...
Based on the above, the question arises: could such machines be in demand in the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS)?
Information