Boeing F-47 Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD)

www.twz.com

F-47 Fighter Program Could See Multiple Versions Built In Increments

Top U.S. officials that had a major hand in the NGAD fighter program say it was designed to be built in iterative increments, not just as a single configuration. Former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Andrew Hunter discussed “Increments” of NGAD...
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
Forest Green said:
www.twz.com

F-47 Fighter Program Could See Multiple Versions Built In Increments

Top U.S. officials that had a major hand in the NGAD fighter program say it was designed to be built in iterative increments, not just as a single configuration. Former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Andrew Hunter discussed “Increments” of NGAD...
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
No different to building in Blocks or Tranches - which we've been doing since the mid/late '70s.
 
Last edited:
DWG said:
No different to building in Blocks or Tranches - which we've been doing since the mid/late '70s.
Click to expand...

The difference is that they potentially see different prime contractors producing the next block. I’m doubtful that is workable - makes more sense for a CCA - but we shall see.
 
Ainen said:
And here i have my reasons to doubt.
While looking at commercial hardware and software is subjective, it is a way to measure relevant fields; we have no better way anyway. With this approach, there is little room for giving F-35 superiority; given how Lockheed visibly struggles with things that are rather normal outside of military, it's frankly a bit of discount even to expect J-20 to be equally troubled.
And the later we take the pairs(for example, for blk.4 F-35 that would be J-35A and J-20B), the higher my personal assesment of chinese capability will be.
Click to expand...

Circling back to this - that is not a fair comparison. There will never be a public discussion of PRC failure. I would love to hear what a “zero covid” internet search returns in China. Certainly ‘ tiananmen square’ or ‘winny the poo’ will not bring back a result, so it is hard to imagine ‘J-20 development problems’ does either. As such, I do not consider the lack of criticism of the J-20 program to be proof that it has been executed flawlessly, particularly since we know the WS-15 is the desired engine.
 
Josh_TN said:
The difference is that they potentially see different prime contractors producing the next block. I’m doubtful that is workable - makes more sense for a CCA - but we shall see.
Click to expand...
The RAF did that throughout the 30s-50s. Development contracts and production contracts went to different companies as often as not. It's theoretically how the Russian system worked with separate OKBs and production organisations, the best example might be Flanker production at multiple sites, with KnAAPO and Irkutsk handling the export variants.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom