Transport Bomber

[Babur Han]

The use of Transport Aircraft like C-130, A-400M, C-17 etc. could fill the Gap of an strategic Bomber in some armed Forces. Conventional Fighter - Bomber seems not to be in a Proper Role as Cruise Missile Carrier and 10 fighter - Bomber will be needet to reach the same effect of one B-52. By using Transport Planes for that Role the Cost for aquireing, Maintinance and Traing will be saved !

Is the use of Transport Planes as ALCM Carrier an Alternative for strategic Bomber ?

 

[Penguin]

yIt should tell you something that the USAF 747 CMCA cruise missile carrier, considered by the U.S. Air Force during the development of the B1 strategic bomber was abandoned in favor of more conventional strategic bombers. The RAF's FOAS (Future Offensive Air System) was also cancelled. The FOAS was a study which sought to replace the RAFs strike capability currently provided by the Tornado GR4. Initial operation capability was expected around 2017. The FOAS was cancelled in June 2005 and replaced by the Deep and Persistent Offensive Capability (DPOC) requirement, which was itself cancelled in the 2010 SDSR. In 2012 France signed an MoU to join the RAF's latest programme for an unmanned Future Combat Air System (FCAS), which will likely be based on BAE's Taranis demonstrator.

BUT .... IMAGINE WHAT OU COULD DO, USING AS A BASE THIS 747 VARIANT ....

See Transport-Bombers:

A Conceptual Shift in Precision Guided Munitions Delivery

 

[Babur Han]

The Russian Air Force has tested a strategic cargo plane in bomber role
Feb 06 2015 - 25 Comments

By Jacek Siminski
Russia has turned an Il-76 strategic cargo plane into bomber during recent trials
The Russian Air Force has conducted tests with an Il-76MD (NATO codename Candid) aircraft carrying training bombs during trials organized in the Tver region, north of Moscow, Ilyushin announced on Jan. 30.

According to the company, the aircraft carried four 50-kg P-50T dumb bombs on hard-points under the wings.



The “attack run” would see the crew find the airfield, visually inspect it with flares and then drop the bombs ahead of landing on the field, located well behind the enemy lines.

The drops should be conducted with 500 km/h of speed (ca. 270 knots) and 500-1000 m (1650 – 3280 feet) of altitude.

Ilyushin claims that bombs will make it possible to employ the Il-76MD in operations which would involve airfields with unprepared or unfamiliar runways, located in a contested territory.

VVS aims to train 10 crews in the new “strike” role; teams that, according to IHS Jane’s, will be stationed in the Tver, Orenburg, Pskov, and Taganrog regions.

IHS Jane’s additionally notes another issue – the place where the specially trained crews are stationed, excluding the Orenburg region, which borders Kazakhstan, will make it possible for the transport jets to conduct strikes over Ukraine or the Baltic States.

Generally speaking, using bombs with a transport aircraft is not a new idea. One should take into account the (armored and heavily armed) U.S. AC-130 gunships which were fairly successful when employed as CAS (Close Air Support) platforms. U.S. Air Force has also used transport aircraft to drop GBU-43/B MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast, also known as the Mother of All Bombs) thermobaric weapons. These were dropped with the use of C-130 Hercules aircraft, mostly the MC-130E Combat Talon I or MC-130H Combat Talon II variants.

C-17 Globemasters were also said to be capable to deliver this armament.



Even though transport aircraft have been successfully transformed in bombers in the past, the heavy and scarcely maneuverable aircraft carrying weapons can only be employed during low-intensity conflicts, in areas where virtually no air-defenses exist. Otherwise, using a troop-carrier as a heavy bomber to drop dumb bombs through a SAM-infested airspace, as the one surrounding an enemy airfield, would be almost suicidal.

The Aviationist » The Russian Air Force has tested a strategic cargo plane in bomber role

 

[Penguin]

USAF/Boeing proposal for a 747 based ALCM launcher from 1977.
This was based on the 747-200F and was to have a max load of 72 ALCM's

Flying Boomers, Part 2 » The Unwanted Blog

Next, think Airbus 380, with 2 full decks, plus more compact missiles...

 

[Babur Han]

USAF/Boeing proposal for a 747 based ALCM launcher from 1977.
This was based on the 747-200F and was to have a max load of 72 ALCM's

72 ALCM is a immense Firepower and this Combined with Range of AGM-86 which is around 3000 KM ! I can realy Imagine which Firepower Airbus A-380 will have by it's Size plus more compact Missiles, but I see some lack of politic will in Europe !

 

[Penguin]

72 is absolutely impressive considering a B-52 can carry up to 20 for a combat radius of 3,890 nmi or 7,210 km

The 747-8 is the largest 747 version, the largest commercial aircraft built in the United States, and the longest passenger aircraft in the world. A 747-800 based CMCA could pack close to 100 long-range stealthy cruise missiles and fly all the way across the Pacific Ocean from the US without inflight refuelling to devastate 100 strategic enemy targets in a single volley, with minimal risk to its operators lives.
8,000 nmi; 14,800 km at MTOW with 467 passengers and baggage
4,390 nmi ; 8,130 km at full payload (295,800 lb or 134,000 kg)

By comparison, the world's largest passenger airliner Airbus A380 has a range at design load of 15,700 km (8,500 nmi) passenger version, 10,400 km (5,600 nmi) freight version.

 

[Vassnti]

72 is absolutely impressive considering a B-52 can carry up to 20 for a combat radius of 3,890 nmi or 7,210 km

The 747-8 is the largest 747 version, the largest commercial aircraft built in the United States, and the longest passenger aircraft in the world. A 747-800 based CMCA could pack close to 100 long-range stealthy cruise missiles and fly all the way across the Pacific Ocean from the US without inflight refuelling to devastate 100 strategic enemy targets in a single volley, with minimal risk to its operators lives.
8,000 nmi; 14,800 km at MTOW with 467 passengers and baggage
4,390 nmi ; 8,130 km at full payload (295,800 lb or 134,000 kg)

By comparison, the world's largest passenger airliner Airbus A380 has a range at design load of 15,700 km (8,500 nmi) passenger version, 10,400 km (5,600 nmi) freight version.

and what happens to comercial flights the moment one side starts arming 747's?

 

[Penguin]

and what happens to comercial flights the moment one side starts arming 747's?

Nothing. In peacetime all aircraft , including military, file flight plans and have their transponders on. There is no issue with civilian airframe models used in military roles e.g. AWACS, KC, EC, MPA etc. The idea is AIR FORCE BOMBERS, not sneaky-made-to-looklike-civilian-airliners. Note: the same ideas have been considered for transports such as C-17. Noone would confused a C17 with a civilian airliner, ever.
Transport-Bombers:A Conceptual Shift in Precision Guided Munitions Delivery
www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA459951

 

[alimobin memon]

Pakistan has used its c130 in bomber role in Indo pak wars

 

[Oldman1]

and what happens to comercial flights the moment one side starts arming 747's?

That would be the least of our concerns in a warzone eh? All flights would be banned or diverted.

 

[Penguin]

Pakistan has used its c130 in bomber role in Indo pak wars

NB We're not talking about some 500 or 1000 kg bombs (il-76 was used to drop normal bombs too), but rather the strategic bombing role.

 

[alimobin memon]

NB We're not talking about some 500 or 1000 kg bombs (il-76 was used to drop normal bombs too), but rather the strategic bombing role.

Right, My point is that our forces have used c130 as bombers so they do have basic know how of how to conduct bombings using c130 they can further enhance using special equipment for precision bombing.

 

[Penguin]

That would be the least of our concerns in a warzone eh? All flights would be banned or diverted.

See KC10, EC-135, E-3, JSTARS, P-8 etc.

Comet <> Nimrod

Likewise Lockheed Electra and Lockheed Orion or, for that matter, Il-18 airliner and Il-38 maritime patrol aircreft.

Not new to have an armed version of an airliner
Focke-Wulf Fw 200 Condor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bloch MB.162 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Piaggio P.108 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Or you do it the other way around:

Tupolev Tu-70 (NATO reporting name: Cart) was a Soviet passenger variant of the Tu-4 bomber (which was a reverse-engineered copy of the American-made Boeing B-29 Superfortress+

The Tupolev Tu-104 (NATO reporting name: Camel) was a twin-engined medium-range narrow-body turbojet-powered Soviet airliner and the world's first successful jet airliner. Tupolev OKB, which based their new airliner on its Tu-16 'Badger' strategic bomber.

The Tupolev Tu-114 Rossiya (Russian: Tyполев Тy-114 Poccия) (NATO reporting name Cleat) is a turboprop-powered long-range airliner designed by the Tupolev design bureau and built in the USSR from May 1955. based on the Tupolev Tu-95 strategic bomber

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

have we forgotten this

 

[janon]

A 747-800 based CMCA could pack close to 100 long-range stealthy cruise missiles and fly all the way across the Pacific Ocean from the US without inflight refuelling to devastate 100 strategic enemy targets in a single volley, with minimal risk to its operators lives.

Wouldn't it be simpler to launch a hundred surface to surface missiles?