USAF/USN 6th Gen Fighters - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA, ASFS News & Analysis

Status
Not open for further replies.
GTX said:
THIS IS TOTALLY FICTIONAL BS INCLUDED IN THIS THREAD ONLY FOR THE LAUGH OR TO MAKE YOU ROLL YOU EYES.
Click to expand...
"Hey CGI department, I need you to make a futuristic looking fighter aircraft. What? No, the design doesn't have to make any sense, just make it look future-ry, like something from Star Wars."
 

Podcast: The Race To Replace The F-22 Raptor Begins | Aviation Week Network

The U.S. Air Force plans to award a contract for a fighter aircraft to replace the F-22 Raptor in 2024.
aviationweek.com aviationweek.com
Highlights IMO:
"..It was really clear that the Air Force is trying to kinda reinvent the fighter with NGAD. I mean, in a way, each new fighter is a reinvention of the old[...] For the first time since the Cold War ended they're not trying to integrate the ability to complete the kill chain on a single platform"
Click to expand...
Well, of course.
"...I think there might have been something like an X-Plane flyoff, at least two of these companies already, if they're at this stage, just like we saw on F-35 and just like we saw on F-22..."
Click to expand...
Indeed, probably the unveiling of the demonstrators already happened in private, inside a hangar within a hangar.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzD4KyB4DpM&t=1s&pp=ugMICgJlcxABGAHKBQ94LTM1IHVudmVpbGxpbmc%3D

"In the mid 10s you saw all of the defense companies show renderings of next generation fighter, before that got locked down and they weren't allowed to do that anymore. All showing tailless supersonic planforms. AFRL also invested significantly on[...] the ESAV program. Tailless and supersonic at the same time"
Click to expand...
Wat...
 
FighterJock said:
Will Boeing do the unthinkable and win a fighter program? From what I have seen of the designs I think that they just might, after not winning the JSF competition I think that Boeing has a strong contender this time round.
Click to expand...

Boeing has been tanking one program after another for the US, on top of its own flagship projects. I hope they are not involved.
 
I am concerned that the NGAD program doesn't have a clear strategic / operational view of the next 20 years. It has swung between "do everything" to "do something" to "really the CCA is what matters" and back again. In all honesty, there seems to be 3 fighter programs required in the next 10-15 years (F-35 replacement, F-22 replacement, F-15EX / EF-111 replacement), but clearly there isn't enough money. Which leaves the NGAD/CCA mission swinging wildly between the different poles.
 
FighterJock said:
All I can say is that whoever wins the NGAD program better not mess it up like being over budget or late, or they will be out of the military aviation business for good.
Click to expand...
Let the race begin!
 
DrRansom said:
I am concerned that the NGAD program doesn't have a clear strategic / operational view of the next 20 years. It has swung between "do everything" to "do something" to "really the CCA is what matters" and back again. In all honesty, there seems to be 3 fighter programs required in the next 10-15 years (F-35 replacement, F-22 replacement, F-15EX / EF-111 replacement), but clearly there isn't enough money. Which leaves the NGAD/CCA mission swinging wildly between the different poles.
Click to expand...
I think it would be a mistake to take press interest jacknifing between various aspects of this program for USAF leadership focus. General Brown's been getting rather amazingly high marks for running his department, so much so he was the runaway favorite to be the new Joint Chiefs chairman, and Kendall set up the B-21 program which is now doing so well. Those two are near enough the ideal choices to be in charge of setting NGAD up for success.
 
FighterJock said:
Will Boeing do the unthinkable and win a fighter program? From what I have seen of the designs I think that they just might, after not winning the JSF competition I think that Boeing has a strong contender this time round.
Click to expand...
they have the mq-25 and mq-28 goin foward that have so much potential for expansions (new variant or other customers). I wouldn't just give them an advantage here.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
GTX said:
THIS IS TOTALLY FICTIONAL BS INCLUDED IN THIS THREAD ONLY FOR THE LAUGH OR TO MAKE YOU ROLL YOU EYES.
Click to expand...
"Hey CGI department, I need you to make a futuristic looking fighter aircraft. What? No, the design doesn't have to make any sense, just make it look future-ry, like something from Star Wars."
Click to expand...
My companies "cgi dept" are engineers who feed what they want to artists.... I'm sure other companies are similarly structured.
 
Moose said:
DrRansom said:
I am concerned that the NGAD program doesn't have a clear strategic / operational view of the next 20 years. It has swung between "do everything" to "do something" to "really the CCA is what matters" and back again. In all honesty, there seems to be 3 fighter programs required in the next 10-15 years (F-35 replacement, F-22 replacement, F-15EX / EF-111 replacement), but clearly there isn't enough money. Which leaves the NGAD/CCA mission swinging wildly between the different poles.
Click to expand...
I think it would be a mistake to take press interest jacknifing between various aspects of this program for USAF leadership focus. General Brown's been getting rather amazingly high marks for running his department, so much so he was the runaway favorite to be the new Joint Chiefs chairman, and Kendall set up the B-21 program which is now doing so well. Those two are near enough the ideal choices to be in charge of setting NGAD up for success.
Click to expand...
Who says the b21 is doing well? Its one thing to finish an airframe and another to finish the avionics and software. The aircraft is behind schedule last time I was checked
 
DrRansom said:
I am concerned that the NGAD program doesn't have a clear strategic / operational view of the next 20 years. It has swung between "do everything" to "do something" to "really the CCA is what matters" and back again. In all honesty, there seems to be 3 fighter programs required in the next 10-15 years (F-35 replacement, F-22 replacement, F-15EX / EF-111 replacement), but clearly there isn't enough money. Which leaves the NGAD/CCA mission swinging wildly between the different poles.
Click to expand...
You're just thing off public statements that a lot of times are disinformation. Things are more solidified behind locked doors or else we would not be doing tooling studies and roughing out avionics circuits
 
rooster said:
Who says the b21 is doing well? Its one thing to finish an airframe and another to finish the avionics and software. The aircraft is behind schedule last time I was checked
Click to expand...

It is mildly behind schedule and last I checked still on budget. That has to make it the heavy weight champion of DoD programs for the last three decades, outside of maybe the F-18E and P-8. Considering the end product is an intercontinental stealth bomber, it's hard to argue that it hasn't been a fairly successful program so far.
 
rooster said:
Colonial-Marine said:
GTX said:
THIS IS TOTALLY FICTIONAL BS INCLUDED IN THIS THREAD ONLY FOR THE LAUGH OR TO MAKE YOU ROLL YOU EYES.
Click to expand...
"Hey CGI department, I need you to make a futuristic looking fighter aircraft. What? No, the design doesn't have to make any sense, just make it look future-ry, like something from Star Wars."
Click to expand...
My companies "cgi dept" are engineers who feed what they want to artists.... I'm sure other companies are similarly structured.
Click to expand...
This is one of the comments that I have most enjoyed reading on this forum. You described in a few words the correct way in which the "design activity" works. The design of ANY PRODUCT usually starts with a simple pencil and paper drawing, not a CAD drawing done in Catia as many assume. As a designer I appreciate your words. Regards!
 
Last edited:
rooster said:
You're just thing off public statements that a lot of times are disinformation. Things are more solidified behind locked doors or else we would not be doing tooling studies and roughing out avionics circuits
Click to expand...

NGAD starts mid 2010s as a super-plane to dominate the airspace. Then, sometime in the last 3 years, CCA comes from nowhere to a program of similar public importance to NGAD and certainly coming sooner. These could be misinformation shifts, but would a whole new public campaign (CCA with its 1000 airframes) be a throw-away project?

We will see, the AF chair was selected for the next Joint Chief, so somebody is happy about his performance, along some aspect of his leadership.
 
NGAD was always going to involve UAVs. As far as I can tell the only thing that changed with CCA is that its products will likely be applied to legacy aircraft outside the NGAD program and was this split out as a separate entity.
 
It's actually from LM CRANE paper
ICE has a little bit different planform
 
Let’s wait and see dark sidius. A lot can change between initial concept art and actual prototype aircraft, the next year is going to be highly interesting.
 

Attachments

  • Wed_Montoro.pdf
    2.2 MB · Views: 30
  • titled.png
    titled.png
    247.9 KB · Views: 123
  • titled3.png
    titled3.png
    208.8 KB · Views: 112
  • titled4.png
    titled4.png
    126.3 KB · Views: 194
I just had a random thought - what would an aircraft look like that could go up against a dozen F22-s and win without a scratch?
After playing some DCS, I think I have a potential answer. I think if you had an aircraft that had a credible way of defending itself against anti-air missiles (essentially having a flying anti-missile battery/laser, but I think the former is more likely), as well as ways of detecting stealth aircraft (probably a combination of IRSTs/medium wave radars. none of the stealth fighters are particularly stealthy in lower frequency bands ).
It would also have a compliment of huge anti-air missiles (like air-breathing super-Meteors), that would outrange any modern missile by a comfortable margin,

It would probably have a drone escort, much like carrier groups, to establish a defensive/offensive perimeter, to increase sensors/missile defense range.

Essentially what I have in mind would be a huge, bomber size AWACS combined with a flying Patriot battery.

Stealth, supermaneuverability, Mach 1,2,3 supercruise might be present but are not essential to the concept, It might even be an E-2 Hawkeye, with missiles.
 
Elysium said:
I just had a random thought - what would an aircraft look like that could go up against a dozen F22-s and win without a scratch?
After playing some DCS, I think I have a potential answer. I think if you had an aircraft that had a credible way of defending itself against anti-air missiles (essentially having a flying anti-missile battery/laser, but I think the former is more likely), as well as ways of detecting stealth aircraft (probably a combination of IRSTs/medium wave radars. none of the stealth fighters are particularly stealthy in lower frequency bands ).
It would also have a compliment of huge anti-air missiles (like air-breathing super-Meteors), that would outrange any modern missile by a comfortable margin,

It would probably have a drone escort, much like carrier groups, to establish a defensive/offensive perimeter, to increase sensors/missile defense range.

Essentially what I have in mind would be a huge, bomber size AWACS combined with a flying Patriot battery.

Stealth, supermaneuverability, Mach 1,2,3 supercruise might be present but are not essential to the concept, It might even be an E-2 Hawkeye, with missiles.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, my Dear Sir - you just qualified as a budding sci-fi writer! I wish I could live in your world, but alas, I'm stuck in the real universe.
 
martinbayer said:
Elysium said:
I just had a random thought - what would an aircraft look like that could go up against a dozen F22-s and win without a scratch?
After playing some DCS, I think I have a potential answer. I think if you had an aircraft that had a credible way of defending itself against anti-air missiles (essentially having a flying anti-missile battery/laser, but I think the former is more likely), as well as ways of detecting stealth aircraft (probably a combination of IRSTs/medium wave radars. none of the stealth fighters are particularly stealthy in lower frequency bands ).
It would also have a compliment of huge anti-air missiles (like air-breathing super-Meteors), that would outrange any modern missile by a comfortable margin,

It would probably have a drone escort, much like carrier groups, to establish a defensive/offensive perimeter, to increase sensors/missile defense range.

Essentially what I have in mind would be a huge, bomber size AWACS combined with a flying Patriot battery.

Stealth, supermaneuverability, Mach 1,2,3 supercruise might be present but are not essential to the concept, It might even be an E-2 Hawkeye, with missiles.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, my Dear Sir - you just qualified as a budding sci-fi writer! I wish I could live in your world, but alas, I'm stuck in the real universe.
Click to expand...
On the contrary, the proposal I outline is very reasonable, and conservative. It's been often said that planes have lost the advantages of both speed and maneuverability to missiles. No matter how fast your airplane is, or how many G's it can pull, it's possible to construct (a possibly multi-stage) missile that can travel 300km, then do 30Gs and Mach 5. Such a missile won't be cheap and won't be small, that's why we need a big carrier vehicle for it.

As for stealth, it has been basically admitted that modern fighters are only stealthy in the higher bands.
The only jets that can probably stay stealthy even in the lower bands are flying wings.
It's even mentioned on wikipedia that the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye's APY-9 radar operating in UHF band has significant anti-stealth capability. Similarly, ground-based systems, such as the S-400 also claim to have anti-stealth capability. Add in a set of radars in other bands, state-of-the-art IRST and you probably have a very good chance of detecting a stealth fighter (or missile) of today from quite a distance away.

Another method to solve the stealth puzzle could be multistatic radars, where the radar is divided between multiple airframes of the accompanying drone swarm, which is said to be a component of next generation air systems anyway.

I also don't think intercepting missiles is that unfeasible, as such systems, either using guns, lasers or missiles already exist for ships, tanks or ground based targets.

All the capabilities outlined in this post need not exist on a single airframe, and active missile defense and/or anti-aircraft capability will be enhanced by a heterogeneous and layered swarm of drones that would be analogous to the networked ground-based SAM systems of today.

I think many components of this system outlined here will be comprised of modified versions of aircraft that are flying today, and said aircraft won't rely on speed, stealth or maneuverability to defeat their enemies, and thus will be quite boring, a far cry from some hypothetical 'Firefox' superplane that can do 12Gs at Mach 3 and has the radar cross section of a flea, that really gets peoples imaginations going.
 
FighterJock said:
I cannot wait to see the artwork rooster.
Click to expand...
Though the declassified is what I refer to and will only refer to, i don't think it's wise and leaves an electronic trail. Its nothing you haven't seen but more details and much bigger or closer up. What you're seeing isnt far from the mark but with changes to make them real air vehicles. Much like the Lockheed ATF artwork from the 80s. Much like the Lockheed ATF artwork from the 80s. Big like a sukhoi and maybe a little bigger. Optimized for broadband stealth but still with the ability to be deadly close up but surrounded by relatively cheap drones. what can I say? Its full steam ahead 110% with boatloads of money being spent and I expect 2 drones to be revealed first before the manned vehicle but that's rumor. Unfortunately 200 seems to be accurate for now. I suspect if the drones don't perform them they will have to revise those numbers if congress doesn't cut. I will say don't expect super cruising drones.... So I don't know how that plays out operationally with a super cruising manned vehicle. Drones in first? Who knows I'm a grunt engineer.
 
rooster said:
Though the declassified is what I refer to and will only refer to, i don't think it's wise and leaves an electronic trail. Its nothing you haven't seen but more details and much bigger or closer up. What you're seeing isnt far from the mark but with changes to make them real air vehicles. Much like the Lockheed ATF artwork from the 80s. Much like the Lockheed ATF artwork from the 80s. Big like a sukhoi and maybe a little bigger. Optimized for broadband stealth but still with the ability to be deadly close up but surrounded by relatively cheap drones. what can I say? Its full steam ahead 110% with boatloads of money being spent and I expect 2 drones to be revealed first before the manned vehicle but that's rumor. Unfortunately 200 seems to be accurate for now. I suspect if the drones don't perform them they will have to revise those numbers if congress doesn't cut. I will say don't expect
Click to expand...
Can you at least tell us if it’s as good looking as a sukhoi? ;)
 
Elysium said:
As for stealth, it has been basically admitted that modern fighters are only stealthy in the higher bands.
Click to expand...

You don't need to be stealthy across all bands, and to try is a waste of effort.
You only need to disrupt the adversary kill chain. You can do that by being very hard to detect to just one part of the kill chain.

Elysium said:
The only jets that can probably stay stealthy even in the lower bands are flying wings.
Click to expand...

Not true. Reducing RCS at low frequencies can be done if the target is *electrically large*. A lower frequency means a larger wavelength. For shaping to be effective surface features need to be several wavelengths in size. So a large, B-2 sized aircraft can be very stealthy at low frequencies through shaping.

It is more difficult to reduce the RCS of a fighter sized target at low frequencies, but not impossible. It is generally not worth the effort. Low frequencies are used for a small part of a kill chain. A low frequency radar can tell that the target is there, but not with enough precision to guide a weapon.
 
quellish said:
You don't need to be stealthy across all bands, and to try is a waste of effort.
You only need to disrupt the adversary kill chain. You can do that by being very hard to detect to just one part of the kill chain.
Click to expand...
Perhaps too early to say, but saying 'waste' is premature.
The chance USAF NGAD will go for C/L stealth is currently quite high.
 
A peek at what's been going on behind the scenes across the programs that have been/are one of the fundamental driving forces tied to 6th Gen fighter efforts which evolved from ESAV/ESAVE.

Boeing OPTIMUS:
https://www.highergov.com/grant-opp...ted-multidisciplinary-systems-optimus-238179/

"The OPTimized Integrated MUltidisciplinary Systems (OPTIMUS) program will bring new coupled systems (actuation, power, thermal, engines) to the Multidisciplinary Optimized MDO conceptual design space for high speed aircraft such as next generation air dominance aircraft. The desired outcome is enhanced MDO methods, integrated operational analyses, geographically distributed design, and demonstration of the work on a Future Air Dominance conceptual design. Some key issues include looking at key coupled aircraft systems earlier in the design process, and defining what fidelity is needed at various milestones in the process. In addition, the development of distributed co-design/simulation is expected. Optimization parameters shall be tied to focused mission level assessment methods..."

LM's EXPEDITE.
Screenshot 2023-06-09 at 20-14-03 Lockheed Martin Overview of the AFRL EXPEDITE Program AIAA S...png
 

Attachments

  • MSTC.png
    MSTC.png
    279.7 KB · Views: 256
  • 1430_Lupp_EBD-overview-slides.pdf
    4.6 MB · Views: 123
  • Kolonay_PIMDAOEvent2021Rev3.pdf
    5.8 MB · Views: 93
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom