USAF/USN 6th Gen Fighter - General Discussion and Speculation

After the presentation of Boeing's F-47 by Trump, it was expected that the US Navy's 6th Gen Fighter, the F/A-XX, would also be unveiled that same week. But was there any official announcement? Why hasn't it been revealed yet?
 
NikolasTz said:
Why hasn't it been revealed yet?
Click to expand...
Most likely due to all the fallout in Washington because of signalgate or how they call it, the literal group chat leaks so to speak. At least it's a reasonable and commonly cited explanation.

It will most likely get publicly announced once that whole ordeal isn't the main story anymore.
 
NikolasTz said:
After the presentation of Boeing's F-47 by Trump, it was expected that the US Navy's 6th Gen Fighter, the F/A-XX, would also be unveiled that same week. But was there any official announcement? Why hasn't it been revealed yet?
Click to expand...
Isn't there a big USN or Naval Aviation meeting coming soon?
 
It may be that the navy decision will be announced in a low key way. Like simply through a press statement, who got the contract. then in the months and years to come, further details may leak out, like designation, images and so on.
 
Kat Tsun said:
The real economy is building as big a carrier as your shipyards can handle. For some people, this number is increasing. For others, it isn't.
Click to expand...
At this point, the economy is to build a shipyard that can handle a ~1000ft long hull and 100ktons, then have it build your carriers.
 
Is this possible that the delay about FA/XX announcement could be a come back of Lockheed in the game ?
 
dark sidius said:
Is this possible that the delay about FA/XX announcement could be a come back of Lockheed in the game ?
Click to expand...
Unlikely the bidders or proposals have changed. Keep 2 things in mind: First, we only had rumors that an announcement was coming this past week and rumors can be wrong. Second, as I said earlier this is a program which will run decades from beginning to end, a week or two slippage for an announcement doesn't mean much. There is as yet not evidence of a Kendall-like "whoa, we need to throw on the brakes and have another look!" delay. Stay calm.
 
Moose said:
Unlikely the bidders or proposals have changed. Keep 2 things in mind: First, we only had rumors that an announcement was coming this past week and rumors can be wrong. Second, as I said earlier this is a program which will run decades from beginning to end, a week or two slippage for an announcement doesn't mean much. There is as yet not evidence of a Kendall-like "whoa, we need to throw on the brakes and have another look!" delay. Stay calm.
Click to expand...
Also, USN has been much more tightly focused on what they wanted.
 
Scott Kenny said:
At this point, the economy is to build a shipyard that can handle a ~1000ft long hull and 100ktons, then have it build your carriers.
Click to expand...
That's not even that big by modern ship standards. The Ford class is 337m long, but some cargo ships are larger, like the Ever Given is 400m (the one that got stuck in the Suez canal). I'm not really a ship nerd, there might be larger ships out there.
 
Elysium said:
That's not even that big by modern ship standards. The Ford class is 337m long, but some cargo ships are larger, like the Ever Given is 400m (the one that got stuck in the Suez canal). I'm not really a ship nerd, there might be larger ships out there.
Click to expand...
It's not, but carriers/military ships in general are significantly more complex. More systems, more subdivisions, etc.

But if you're stuck building your military ships in civilian dockyards, sizing your new drydocks to NeoPANAMAX is probably the best option. And pay for the really huge crane that can clear the width of a carrier while you're at it.
 
www.twz.com

Air Force’s Next Batch Of Collaborative Combat Drones Could Be Less ‘Exquisite,’ Cheaper

The Air Force also confirms it is looking at teaming CCAs with platforms other than fighters, including the B-21 stealth bomber and E-7 radar plane. The Air Force also confirms it is looking at teaming CCAs with platforms other than fighters, including the B-21 stealth bomber and E-7 radar plane.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

www.airandspaceforces.com

Air Force Futures Boss Leans Toward ‘Low End’ CCA in Next Increment | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The next increment of the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, or CCA, is likely to be less complex, the head Air Force futurist said.
www.airandspaceforces.com www.airandspaceforces.com
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
www.twz.com

Air Force’s Next Batch Of Collaborative Combat Drones Could Be Less ‘Exquisite,’ Cheaper

The Air Force also confirms it is looking at teaming CCAs with platforms other than fighters, including the B-21 stealth bomber and E-7 radar plane. The Air Force also confirms it is looking at teaming CCAs with platforms other than fighters, including the B-21 stealth bomber and E-7 radar plane.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
Can't see a cheaper or less exquisite CCA being an effective companion for a B-21. For E-7 or even C-130/17/5 and all KC aircraft would be a good option.

Sounds like the USAF still hasn't defined the requirements for Increment 2 yet but I suppose some testing of Increment 1 helps define what they want from 2.
 
I think incr2 is still an A2A focused aircraft. That was always the goal and A2A is low hanging fruit. If your CCAs can push AD back, anything as simple as a C-130 can dump munitions. I’ll say it again: I don’t see any CCA ever having more payload than a couple BVRs or a quarter of SDB. That’s not why they are there.
 
A simple LO long endurance, LO flying missile pylon with literally nothing besides fuel, flight and automation sensors, data link, small power generation, engine, and four JATMs would be interesting and hopefully cheapish early node - hopefully incr 2. A larger cousin with the ability to refuel and carry 8-12 JATMs would be an interesting escort for HVAA. Lots of fun possibilities.
 
Ozair said:
Can't see a cheaper or less exquisite CCA being an effective companion for a B-21.
Click to expand...
recon. A Sensorcraft type. That's the only CCA I can really see being a useful companion for B-21s.

And I guess technically two different sensorcraft. One subsonic and one supersonic. Yes, think "U-2 and SR-71 but VLO," though I don't think the supersonic one would be Mach 3 due to heating. I'd expect Mach 2.2 or so.



Ozair said:
For E-7 or even C-130/17/5 and all KC aircraft would be a good option.
Click to expand...
Sticking a couple of A2A CCAs with the E7 and KCs would be worth it.

Not sure how well making a CCA Heavy Tanker would work.

Depending on what mission the Cs are doing would depend on what kind of CCAs I'd want with them. A2As for long flights, but add some A2G and jammers for tactical flights.


Ozair said:
Sounds like the USAF still hasn't defined the requirements for Increment 2 yet but I suppose some testing of Increment 1 helps define what they want from 2.
Click to expand...
That's how I understand it as well.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom