USAF/US NAVY 6th Generation Fighter Programs - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA, ASFS news

marauder2048 said:
Can't imagine why you'd be so secretive about an F-35 fuselage plug.
And there are all sorts of contractual (e..g data rights) and certification issues this would run into.
Click to expand...

Especially as the F-35 is a very international product in terms of parts stream. No, I think whatever they built was a UAV. Cheaper materials, smaller air frame, and much less material risk.
 
Obviously still pure speculation but the more articles I read I’m leaning towards an “NGAD Bird of Prey” type aircraft but with:

1) F-35 avionics
2) Advent type engines
 
But who built it? Boeing? LM Skunk works?Northrop (less likely given they have the Raider)? Kratos? SNC?
Don't tell me it's that guy from the Mach3 airforce one.
 
TomcatViP said:
But who built it? Boeing? LM Skunk works?Northrop (less likely given they have the Raider)? Kratos? SNC?
Don't tell me it's that guy from the Mach3 airforce one.
Click to expand...

All of the above: "we wanted to drive digital thread adoption across the industrial base"
None of the above: "we wanted to show the industrial base and others that government owned digital thread permits non-traditional manufacturers..."
 
It really depends on what youre trying to validate with a demonstrator. The airframe and engine combo is I believe the hardest thing to simulate. Even if the engines are not ready, the airframe can be tested with already existing engines (likely F119s for supercruise validation). Let the EMDs do the job of full integration validation later on.

I think it'll be full sized and manned, at least optionally. Room for two crew would make some sense in a networked fighter acting as a drone command ship. Pack it full of AESA arrays, high electrical and cooling capacity. An "EF" designation will be pretty apt if it ends up acting like an "AWACS fighter" which is a likely course. Could let up on internal armament requirements (4x AMRAAMs/8x CUDA?) for more fuel capacity to let the UCAVs be the real offensive and defensive punch. Internal armament really would be more for defense.
 
Given the present F119 engine shortage, I think the F-22 program would be loathe to spare any.
 
TomcatViP said:
But who built it? Boeing? LM Skunk works?Northrop (less likely given they have the Raider)? Kratos? SNC? Don't tell me it's that guy from the Mach3 airforce one.
Click to expand...

Ummm, no. Is Stavatti on your radar? There's rumint chatter indicating that they have taken over the vast underground facility that was abandoned by something called "Project Tic-Toc". 8-P
 
Colonial-Marine said:
marauder2048 said:
Given the present F119 engine shortage, I think the F-22 program would be loathe to spare any.
Click to expand...
There is a shortage of F119s now? Did we buy anything related to the F-22 program in the quantities the Air Force needed?
Click to expand...

They did. But they burned through the F119s at an unexpectedly high clip.

https://www.nationaldefensemagazine...idering-reconfiguring-f22-trainers-for-combat

Holmes speaks:

View: https://youtu.be/vdRY6X6Wm40?t=2645
 
Last edited:
www.defensenews.com

The US Air Force has built and flown a mysterious full-scale prototype of its future fighter jet

Does this give the Next Generation Air Dominance program more momentum, or does it open it up to more scrutiny?
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
Surprised to be the first to post this (I think). Explains the propaganda video we have been talking about.

"The result is that every fighter program becomes existential for companies, who fight to prove that they can meet technical requirements during the development and production phase at a lower cost than their competitors." This appears to be the universal conundrum with the industrial "first tier" countries. I have to wonder if the arrival of more countries capable of producing modern fighter aircraft will change the paradim.
 
Last edited:
yasotay said:
"The result is that every fighter program becomes existential for companies, who fight to prove that they can meet technical requirements during the development and production phase at a lower cost than their competitors.
Click to expand...

Except total lifecycle cost is an inevitable part of every fighter bid since LWF...maybe even before.

Roper's approach, if you do the math that Insinnia didn't, is that if you only fly 200 hours/year and dump the aircraft
before it hits what would be the first or second PDM you save on O&S.

Well..yeah. But..I mean...wait.

It's basically NG's pitch for UCAS-D almost down to the shelf life.
 
Last edited:
marauder2048 said:
Can't imagine why you'd be so secretive about an F-35 fuselage plug.
And there are all sorts of contractual (e.g. data rights) and certification issues this would run into.
Click to expand...
This! Why be so secretive about lengthened 25 year old design? F-35 is fine for what it is but I don't think a f35xl makes anynsense for all the same reasons the 16xl wasnt pursued, I.e. a very heavy single engine aircraft. F-35already is in the same weight class as the f15.... The future of our usaf is an even heavier variant? Without rail launched 9x missiles? If that's what people are selling i am not buying. If its just a plug then we can stop building the 35a and roll right into the 35D.

The lack of photos is indicative of something that needs to be hidden so as to prevent telegraphing like fluidic thrust vectoring and tricked out ir suprrssion.
 
rooster said:
marauder2048 said:
Can't imagine why you'd be so secretive about an F-35 fuselage plug.
And there are all sorts of contractual (e.g. data rights) and certification issues this would run into.
Click to expand...
This! Why be so secretive about lengthened 25 year old design? F-35 is fine for what it is but I don't think a f35xl makes anynsense for all the same reasons the 16xl wasnt pursued, I.e. a very heavy single engine aircraft. F-35already is in the same weight class as the f15.... The future of our usaf is an even heavier variant? Without rail launched 9x missiles? If that's what people are selling i am not buying. If its just a plug then we can stop building the 35a and roll right into the 35D.

The lack of photos is indicative of something that needs to be hidden so as to prevent telegraphing like fluidic thrust vectoring and tricked out ir suprrssion.
Click to expand...

Slight OT but personally, I think a fuselage plugged F-35 with an AETP engine would be nearly as compelling as Lockheed's proposed
40-inch fuselage plug for the F-22 aka the F-22E.

I think the larger issue is that the opportunity for industrial base competition/health there is small beyond the propulsion suppliers
and it's probably still entangled with data rights issues since I'm sure Lockheed has proposed/studied something like it.

I don't think AIM-9X carriage is much of a concern given where MSDM/SACM/AIM-260/Peregrine are taking us.

But I totally agree with your view that what they are demonstrating at scale is sensitive enough to be worth hiding.
 
Last edited:
marauder2048 said:
Do you buy that: with an overlapped AoA no less, they commenced a TMRR effort that resulted in a
full scale flight demonstrator in one year?
Click to expand...

Yes.
I believe - based on following the funding, and things I found while looking for another program - that it is/was a small-scope technology demonstrator. Not at all representative of a prototype of a productized system (i.e. not a YF-22 - no exotic avionics, existing GFE engine). More like Bird of Prey, but (I believe) as much impact as Have Blue. And not something they could hide for long. I've also seen what look like investments in other areas to take advantage of the (coming) impact of the technology.

It's like going from moveable type and hot lead to desktop publishing and laser printers.
 
Hood said:
I still wish they had built the X-44 Manta.
What's the betting that the NGAD will look very similar?
Click to expand...
Define "very." A fully tailless, blended design looks very possible, and a prototype "based on" existing F-22 structures wouldn't be all that shocking. But if they're designing for very long range, directed energy, etc I doubt many people as knowledgeable as those on this site would see it as being part of the same family.
 
I'd like to suggest something different being demonstrated. First, if this was an airframe/structures excercise, I think the intent could be to print an airplane (additive using multiple materials including CFRP, Al, and Ti) without an engine/avionics/landing gear. We don't know if this is a full scale prototype or if it was manned or unmanned. This could also be an attempt to develop an advanced electronics suite - one with a common set of apertures that drive the function of radar, comm, and importantly, directed energy. So no more separate radar, comm suite, etc. Thinking about the comment Roper made about breaking records, it just seems to me the records he is talking about (again, my view) are how long it takes to build a prototype. To me, that infers they may be trying to print an airplane which, in my view, would not only eliminate the touch labor cost component, but allow for a very rapid assembly time.
 
doggedman said:
I'd like to suggest something different being demonstrated. First, if this was an airframe/structures excercise, I think the intent could be to print an airplane (additive using multiple materials including CFRP, Al, and Ti) without an engine/avionics/landing gear. We don't know if this is a full scale prototype or if it was manned or unmanned. This could also be an attempt to develop an advanced electronics suite - one with a common set of apertures that drive the function of radar, comm, and importantly, directed energy. So no more separate radar, comm suite, etc. Thinking about the comment Roper made about breaking records, it just seems to me the records he is talking about (again, my view) are how long it takes to build a prototype. To me, that infers they may be trying to print an airplane which, in my view, would not only eliminate the touch labor cost component, but allow for a very rapid assembly time.
Click to expand...

They're not printing airplanes anytime soon. (Not the kind they want to keep around anyway.)
 
The Loral art was done by Atilla Heja and was entirely his creation. He did a cutaway of it too - with four engines no less.
 
Moose said:
Define "very." A fully tailless, blended design looks very possible, and a prototype "based on" existing F-22 structures wouldn't be all that shocking. But if they're designing for very long range, directed energy, etc I doubt many people as knowledgeable as those on this site would see it as being part of the same family.
Click to expand...

I meant in terms of aerodynamic configuration rather than being an F-22 development. NGAD will be a different beast in terms of aerodynamic controls, thrust vectoring and propulsion from the X-44, but it shows that even in the late 1990s the designers had the eye on where things were going in terms of the next generation.
 
I wonder if they are dusting off this old idea.



I hope any "digital" design process is hosted on SIPRnet if multiple vendors are accessing shared modeling databases. NIPRnet has been hacked way too many times. Frankly, trying something different is worth a risk if it reduces current program development time. If it succeeds, the Navy should think about something similar.
 
The AFRL definitely was looking at rapid prototyping and development technologies. I suspect this project, due to how rapidly a flying article was produced, is probably part of or an extension of that. And I think the records that are being broken are development/production times. I can't speak to what fabrication method is being used, but the Russians apparently already have low end 3D printed drones that include 3D printed engines. So depending on the size and performance you are looking at, 3D printing might play a role.
 
One wonders, just how much airframe life and the like does this prototype have, assuming that it isn't a earlier repurposed prototype?
 
quellish said:
marauder2048 said:
Do you buy that: with an overlapped AoA no less, they commenced a TMRR effort that resulted in a
full scale flight demonstrator in one year?
Click to expand...

Yes.
I believe - based on following the funding, and things I found while looking for another program - that it is/was a small-scope technology demonstrator. Not at all representative of a prototype of a productized system (i.e. not a YF-22 - no exotic avionics, existing GFE engine). More like Bird of Prey, but (I believe) as much impact as Have Blue. And not something they could hide for long. I've also seen what look like investments in other areas to take advantage of the (coming) impact of the technology.

It's like going from moveable type and hot lead to desktop publishing and laser printers.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I guess I'm thrown by "full scale flight demonstrator" since Bird or Prey and Have Blue were sub scale.
So I naturally tend to think of YF-22 or X-35. And maybe I'm parsing too closely but the term "prototype" was avoided
Historically and recently that term has had implications of residual operational capability...and operational testing.
 
Josh_TN said:
The AFRL definitely was looking at rapid prototyping and development technologies. I suspect this project, due to how rapidly a flying article was produced, is probably part of or an extension of that. And I think the records that are being broken are development/production times. I can't speak to what fabrication method is being used, but the Russians apparently already have low end 3D printed drones that include 3D printed engines. So depending on the size and performance you are looking at, 3D printing might play a role.
Click to expand...
Well, I absolutely agree. I think printing technology has advanced considerably, especially with Titanium (Norsk Titanium). I think that rapid prototyping has been around for some time, but the difference here may be a meaningful reduction or elimination of the touch labor component. That would give plausibility (in my view) to the idea of having more contractors participate in airframe construction. The real job, however, is still integration and the prime is likely to be NOC, LMT, or BA.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom