2000 lb internal storage + 5000lb external storage (Total of 7000 lbs) per F-22. 7000 X 6 =42,000 lbs.
Again, I fail to understand how you come up with that figure. The F-22 has four under-wing pylon hardpoints, each theoretically capable of carrying
either 600 gallon drop tanks or 5000lbs of ordnance. In the likely scenario that two of these pylon stations (the two inner hardpoints that are 'plumbed') contain drop tanks, the other two will contain external ordnance- which coupled with internal stores will total to an ordnance of 12,000 lbs per Raptor (5000lbs x 2 + 2000lbs).
However, both the Raptor's Sargent Fletcher drop tanks and its external stores significantly increase RCS, and although stealth pods and drop tanks and related jetissonable hard points are being currently worked on, the Raptor's stealth ability is
greatly compromised by external ordnance. Ergo the dual conundrum: to achieve a range of 1,600 nmi / 1,840 mi / 2,960 km (still significantly less than the B-2's 6,000 nmi), the F-22
must convey two external drop tanks, but doing so severely attenuates it's stealth ability. Conversely, to achieve the stealth requisite for a bombing mission, the F-22 must be divested of it's external stores and drop tanks, so that the only ordnance is the one present in its internal bay (a paltry 2000 lbs).
A future stealth bomber is not in the charts right now. Most nations today are trying to build stealthy 5th gen fighters and stealth UCAVs.
Incorrect. Please see:
TheStar.com | Business | Boeing, Lockheed team up on bomber project
Boeing: Boeing and Lockheed Martin Team for Next Generation Bomber Program
There was also the interim (to the 2037 bomber) proposed modified bomber version of the F-22 Raptor called the FB-22, featuring a lengthened fuselage, delta wings, improved stealth, a larger internal weapons bay and a greater range and payload- in the balance presently because of a paucity of funding due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq*.
Northrop Grumman also received in funding in 2008 to the tun of $2 billion for "restricted programs" or 'black programs' – for a technology demonstrator which could fly as early as 2010. [
]Ultra Stealth | AVIATION WEEK
* Amid conflicting rumours that the 2037 bomber was brought forward 2 generations and the FB-22 program was scrapped, Wikipedia mentions the FB-22 as "appear[ing] to be cancelled in lieu of a long range bomber with a much greater range than the FB-22" in the 2006 Quadrennial Review. However, there has been neither confirmation nor explicit mention of the cancellation of the program itself in the said QDR.
If these rumours are true however, we could expect to see a next generation stealth bomber in as little as 10 years (in which case the FB-22 would almost certainly be scrapped, but with the research and advances concomitant of its development serving as a base for the former). Other reports have it that the 2018 bomber and the 2037 bomber are actually two
distinct programs, with the former serving as an interim stop-gap measure. Further reports indicate that the USAF is expected to announce later this year its specific requirements for the 2018 bomber.
The PLAAF [XAC] is also rumoured to be working on an indigenous bomber project, said to resemble the Su-34, as a replacement for its ageing H-6 (Tu-16) medium bomber aircraft over the next tow decades:
Future Bomber Programme - SinoDefence.com
There are also reports of the Russians working on a prototype replacement for the Tu-160 called the PAK-DA (modified bomber version of the PAK-FA) through a consortium led by Sukhoi and Tupolev, and an estimated first flight date of 2015:
PAK-DA: Future Russian Bomber Project, page 1
Even supersonic stealth bombers are still not capable of multirole, and thats their biggest weakness. They have low sortie rates and are plagued by the same weaknesses of most bombers, the inability to clear the skies of enemy aircraft.
AFAIK, there is only one supersonic stealth bomber- a prototype: Project SD-36- that made its maiden flight at the Sergey Martin laboratory in Alpharetta, GA in October last year:
Project SD-36 (Supersonic Scramjet Stealth Bomber) Maiden Flight - RC Groups
While the 'inability to clear the skies of enemy aircraft' is certainly a weakness, it is not what bombers are meant for. That role is limited to multi-role and combat aircraft- with their own mitigating features that limit their bombing ability.
Intercontinental strikes are losing their importance with the advent of ballistic missiles, and more importantly, long-range cruise missiles. An Ohio-class SSBN armed with Tomohawk missiles can deliver precision strikes with much less risk and higher chance of success.
Debatable. But my point was not to purport that as a primary function, merely to point out that range-extension through mid-air refueling is not something only combat/multi-role aircraft are privy to.
Please also refer to Yusuf's post regarding JDAM's. With the advent of JDAM's and integrated inertial guidance systems, previously "dumb" or 'gravity' bombs have now become "smart munitions" with significantly higher success rates.