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

Seams you guys are still fighting the last war but in the vain hope that influential people read this, here's a rant I sent to a friend :-

Yeah. I bet the the Israelis, Poms, Aussies are pissed. But it's a brilliant move. Loyalties aside, the rest of the world follows (sometimes bettering) the US in fighter planes so it seems logical for the US to capitalise on its strength in innovation rather than numbers. By using rapid prototyping and frequent small batches, they can keep the opposition wrong-footed and guessing (and spending heaps to keep up) rather like the Russians are doing to the west in hypersonic weapons. A bit like formula 1. Incredibly small production runs but best tech wins the day.
 
Last edited:
I'm not seeing the problem, aircraft just like cars, move on. UK has bought F35 and bought into the program, no-one said it was the last ever fighter, or indeed the best fighter. We will buy updates as they come.

Only US/China and maybe Russia have the $$ to build a couple of SQN of a type. And really we dont know what is coming yet. Personally im expecting F22+ aerodynamics, a lot of F35 systems, more fuel, more data, maybe 2 seats.
 
I'm sure the numbers of "pissed off" F-35 partners or customers would be very similar to the number of pissed off F-16 partners/customers back when the ATF program was launched or when the YF22 and YF23 demonstrators flew.
 
I also would not be surprised if its a B21 raider, with enough radar and ESM to sit over Bejing, and carries enough AAM to down 10% of the chinese air force in one mission.
 
From the October 2020 issue of Rivista Italiana Difesa, one of the best (maybe the better!) Italian military magazine:

NGAD.jpg
Translation, with Google help (I am lazy on saturday morning):

The American Sixth Generation fighter is already flying
USAF Assistant Secretary Wil Roper said during the Air, Space & Cyber Conference that a demonstrator of the USAF's Sixth Generation fighter - NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) - has already started a test campaign in flight. The revelation shows that the program is quite ahead. After all, many American programs, especially aeronautics, for many years, especially in the demonstration and risk reduction phases, remain surrounded by an aura of secrecy and "jealously" guarded in the "cauldron" of Pentagon "black" initiatives. This is what happened for the F-117, for the RQ-170 SENTINEL and for its bigger and more performing "brother" RQ-180, just to name a few. It would therefore not be a novelty and the writer for some time maintains that the demonstrator of the "sixth" fighter has been in flight for some time, just as he believes that the demonstrators of the new B-21 RAIDER bomber flew for years. The USAF, however, has decided to come out into the open by sending the world, read China and Russia, a pretty clear message. Some renderings circulated so far, show a Next Generation Air Dominance as an all compound wing aircraft, with "crancked" trailing edge, rigorously buried dorsal air intakes, stealth exhaust, also buried in the aircraft structure, and direct energy weapons. USAF and US Navy will carry out 2 different programs for the sixth generation - good news for the American aeronautical sector, especially for Boeing, which remained dry-mouthed with F-35 and RAIDER - thus not retracing the path taken with the F -35.
 
bobbymike said:
breakingdefense.com

NGAD Strategy Faces Hill Headwinds - Breaking Defense

"The business case is a naïve bet on out-year operating cost savings – that’s an act the Hill has seen before, and it never pays off," independent analyst Rebecca Grant says of the Digital Century Series concept.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Basing the futur on the poor capabilities of the F-35 with his little legs and poor air-air capacity is realy giving China the advantage they want.
 
dark sidius said:
bobbymike said:
breakingdefense.com

NGAD Strategy Faces Hill Headwinds - Breaking Defense

"The business case is a naïve bet on out-year operating cost savings – that’s an act the Hill has seen before, and it never pays off," independent analyst Rebecca Grant says of the Digital Century Series concept.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Basing the futur on the poor capabilities of the F-35 with his little legs and poor air-air capacity is realy giving China the advantage they want.
Click to expand...
The poor capabilities of the F-35!

Disappointing to see people still recycling this nonsense from social media and poorly researched online articles. Especially to see it on this forum.
 
Barely hitting M1.6 is based on "poor research"?

Not all capabilities are based on making tight loops. As system F-35 might be quite good thanks to hefty equipment, but as airframe for air duty it stays poor nonetheless.
 
One of the reasons I suggested an F-22 with F-35 systems might still be viable is range/speed. Surely a known product with that kind of ability will remain an great asset for decades. Not like I am asking for the F-35 systems on a Gypsy Moth is it?
 
GARGEAN said:
Barely hitting M1.6 is based on "poor research"?

Not all capabilities are based on making tight loops. As system F-35 might be quite good thanks to hefty equipment, but as airframe for air duty it stays poor nonetheless.
Click to expand...


It's not the hefty equipment. It's the stealth and data fusion as has been explained ad infinitum and demonstrated in actual use. High speed is valuable for a dedicated interceptor so if you need to get somewhere really fast, the F-35 is probably not the best choice. I doubt this is going to cause second thoughts among all the countries lined up to buy it.
 
GARGEAN said:
Barely hitting M1.6 is based on "poor research"?

Not all capabilities are based on making tight loops. As system F-35 might be quite good thanks to hefty equipment, but as airframe for air duty it stays poor nonetheless.
Click to expand...
What a sixties way of looking at things. The F-35 is far more than the simplistic basis of things that you appear to be using here.
 
Physics haven't changed since sixties. If you have good set of equipment on a good aiframe, you are in better position than one that has good set of equipment on flying chubber. F-35 is good for its job, even great one might say. But not as something that can be proudly called NGAD.
And yes, as was mentioned above F-22 airframe with F-35 set of equipment would be THE thing to be proud of.
 
Fusion sensors and all the things like that are beautiful capabilities but you still need speed and long range in a Pacific theater, and a need to intercept a Tu-160 at high speed still exist this days and I don't thing a F-35 is capable off. NGAD is near and I can't understand why politics don't support it a lot, with a demonstrator flying by now .Something flying high speed , long range with stealth and fusion sensors is surely more capable than a F-35. The horrible mistake was stopping F-22 for F-35 .
 
Last edited:
dark sidius said:
TomcatViP said:
C'mon guys, you might not like it but most services adore their F-35, across a wide range of combat domain or nationalities.
Click to expand...
Sure , may be, but instead if they could have an advanced F-22 like could they prefer F-35 ?
Click to expand...
Any 'advanced F22' would cost 2-3x that of F35.

F35 offers good capabilities for what it costs. Sure it doesn't cover them all, but it can strike without being hindered by ground based area denial and doesn't require escorts to sanitize the area.
So its a strike plane that doesn't require any other major asset to conduct mission.
That, in and of itself, is a pretty big cost saver and capability advancement.

Considering that 80+% of missions in a war consist of ground pounding, i don't see why anyone would spend anymore than they are on F35 to get that niche 'advance F22' for the same job.
 
Last edited:
doggedman said:
I don't think any F-35 signatories are remotely angry or pissed off. The Air Force operates two fighter types, a light weight and heavy fighter. The F-35 is the light weight fighter and eventual F-16 replacement. NGAD is a heavy fighter and more likely to replace the F-15 and potentially the F-22.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the Air Force planing to keep the f-16 and the f-15ex until 2048?
 
Bhurki said:
dark sidius said:
TomcatViP said:
C'mon guys, you might not like it but most services adore their F-35, across a wide range of combat domain or nationalities.
Click to expand...
Sure , may be, but instead if they could have an advanced F-22 like could they prefer F-35 ?
Click to expand...
Any 'advanced F22' would cost 2-3x that of F35.

F35 offers good capabilities for what it costs. Sure it doesn't cover them all, but it can strike without being hindered by ground based area denial and doesn't require escorts to sanitize the area.
So its a strike plane that doesn't require any other major asset to conduct mission.
That, in and of itself, is a pretty big cost saver and capability advancement.

Considering that 80+% of missions in a war consist of ground pounding, i don't see why anyone would spend anymore than they are on F35 to get that niche 'advance F22' for the same job.
Click to expand...
A quick look at the different aircraft requirements for a “strike package” during Desert Storm between F-117s and non-stealthy aircraft tells how effective/efficient an all stealth fleet of F-35s can be.
 
ReprobateJoeshmoe said:
doggedman said:
I don't think any F-35 signatories are remotely angry or pissed off. The Air Force operates two fighter types, a light weight and heavy fighter. The F-35 is the light weight fighter and eventual F-16 replacement. NGAD is a heavy fighter and more likely to replace the F-15 and potentially the F-22.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the Air Force planing to keep the f-16 and the f-15ex until 2048?
Click to expand...

The new F-15s sure, but I assume the F-16 fleet is very tired? When is the last time USAF bought a new one?
 
There is not just the ground attack mission , there will be soon a lack in air superiority missions, China J-20 and Su-57 may be surely superior to unstealthy f-15 EX , and in air-air combat I have a little doubt of the superiority of the F-35, and the F-22 fleet is realy too small in a conflict case.
 
The Su-57 total order for delivery by 2027 is 70+ examples, to be completed by 2027. The USAF has over 250 F-35s right now. I consider air superiority against Russia more a of SEAD problem, and the F-35 is the best platform in existence for SEAD once it gets SiAW/AARGM-ER.

J-20 on the other hand exists in numbers and will continue to be produced in quantity, though kinematically I doubt it is on the same level as the Su. I think in a BVR engagement, the F-35 still has an avionics advantage, and that will have to suffice.
 
Josh_TN said:
ReprobateJoeshmoe said:
doggedman said:
I don't think any F-35 signatories are remotely angry or pissed off. The Air Force operates two fighter types, a light weight and heavy fighter. The F-35 is the light weight fighter and eventual F-16 replacement. NGAD is a heavy fighter and more likely to replace the F-15 and potentially the F-22.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the Air Force planing to keep the f-16 and the f-15ex until 2048?
Click to expand...

The new F-15s sure, but I assume the F-16 fleet is very tired? When is the last time USAF bought a new one?
Click to expand...
I read a drive article sometime back that they were planning a slep program for 300 of them.
 
Josh_TN said:
The Su-57 total order for delivery by 2027 is 70+ examples, to be completed by 2027. The USAF has over 250 F-35s right now. I consider air superiority against Russia more a of SEAD problem, and the F-35 is the best platform in existence for SEAD once it gets SiAW/AARGM-ER.

J-20 on the other hand exists in numbers and will continue to be produced in quantity, though kinematically I doubt it is on the same level as the Su. I think in a BVR engagement, the F-35 still has an avionics advantage, and that will have to suffice.
Click to expand...
SEAD mission can be done in quantity by futur B-21 instead of squadrons of F-35 needing a lot of refueling, having F-35 quantity don't realy give superiority in fact with a lot of anti air missile like S-400 and futur S-500. For another part of missions like air superiority avionics is a advantage but you still need kinematic, high ceiling, speed and long range. Catching stealth SU-57 or J-20 flying mach 1.5/2 at flight level 60 with an interceptor flying great max 1.6 at flight level 50 , I have a doubt about who win.. I m a USAF loving but since 2009 mistake was made. F-35 is eating Defense budget for decades and it arrive ten years to late, it is not in a full production 10 years later.
 
dark sidius said:
Josh_TN said:
The Su-57 total order for delivery by 2027 is 70+ examples, to be completed by 2027. The USAF has over 250 F-35s right now. I consider air superiority against Russia more a of SEAD problem, and the F-35 is the best platform in existence for SEAD once it gets SiAW/AARGM-ER.

J-20 on the other hand exists in numbers and will continue to be produced in quantity, though kinematically I doubt it is on the same level as the Su. I think in a BVR engagement, the F-35 still has an avionics advantage, and that will have to suffice.
Click to expand...
SEAD mission can be done in quantity by futur B-21 instead of squadrons of F-35 needing a lot of refueling, having F-35 quantity don't realy give superiority in fact with a lot of anti air missile like S-400 and futur S-500. For another part of missions like air superiority avionics is a advantage but you still need kinematic, high ceiling, speed and long range. Catching stealth SU-57 or J-20 flying mach 1.5/2 at flight level 60 with an interceptor flying great max 1.6 at flight level 50 , I have a doubt about who win.. I m a USAF loving but since 2009 mistake was made. F-35 is eating Defense budget for decades and it arrive ten years to late, it is not in a full production 10 years later.
Click to expand...
What do you suppose they do. The f-35 is a awesome plane but it has a short range and speed. This wouldn’t be such a large problem if we had at least 100 more raptors.
 
ReprobateJoeshmoe said:
dark sidius said:
Josh_TN said:
The Su-57 total order for delivery by 2027 is 70+ examples, to be completed by 2027. The USAF has over 250 F-35s right now. I consider air superiority against Russia more a of SEAD problem, and the F-35 is the best platform in existence for SEAD once it gets SiAW/AARGM-ER.

J-20 on the other hand exists in numbers and will continue to be produced in quantity, though kinematically I doubt it is on the same level as the Su. I think in a BVR engagement, the F-35 still has an avionics advantage, and that will have to suffice.
Click to expand...
SEAD mission can be done in quantity by futur B-21 instead of squadrons of F-35 needing a lot of refueling, having F-35 quantity don't realy give superiority in fact with a lot of anti air missile like S-400 and futur S-500. For another part of missions like air superiority avionics is a advantage but you still need kinematic, high ceiling, speed and long range. Catching stealth SU-57 or J-20 flying mach 1.5/2 at flight level 60 with an interceptor flying great max 1.6 at flight level 50 , I have a doubt about who win.. I m a USAF loving but since 2009 mistake was made. F-35 is eating Defense budget for decades and it arrive ten years to late, it is not in a full production 10 years later.
Click to expand...
What do you suppose they do. The f-35 is a awesome plane but it has a short range and speed. This wouldn’t be such a large problem if we had at least 100 more raptors.
Click to expand...
Well the US might have had these if the politicians hadn’t decided to stop it being exported, and therefore effectively killed the program.

If they do it again with this program then that’s good news for others developing alternative sixth generation programs such as the U.K. and associates.
 
Flyaway said:
ReprobateJoeshmoe said:
dark sidius said:
Josh_TN said:
The Su-57 total order for delivery by 2027 is 70+ examples, to be completed by 2027. The USAF has over 250 F-35s right now. I consider air superiority against Russia more a of SEAD problem, and the F-35 is the best platform in existence for SEAD once it gets SiAW/AARGM-ER.

J-20 on the other hand exists in numbers and will continue to be produced in quantity, though kinematically I doubt it is on the same level as the Su. I think in a BVR engagement, the F-35 still has an avionics advantage, and that will have to suffice.
Click to expand...
SEAD mission can be done in quantity by futur B-21 instead of squadrons of F-35 needing a lot of refueling, having F-35 quantity don't realy give superiority in fact with a lot of anti air missile like S-400 and futur S-500. For another part of missions like air superiority avionics is a advantage but you still need kinematic, high ceiling, speed and long range. Catching stealth SU-57 or J-20 flying mach 1.5/2 at flight level 60 with an interceptor flying great max 1.6 at flight level 50 , I have a doubt about who win.. I m a USAF loving but since 2009 mistake was made. F-35 is eating Defense budget for decades and it arrive ten years to late, it is not in a full production 10 years later.
Click to expand...
What do you suppose they do. The f-35 is a awesome plane but it has a short range and speed. This wouldn’t be such a large problem if we had at least 100 more raptors.
Click to expand...
Well the US might have had these if the politicians hadn’t decided to stop it being exported, and therefore effectively killed the program.

If they do it again with this program then that’s good news for others developing alternative sixth generation programs such as the U.K. and associates.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why the F-35 have so much support by politics instead of the lots of problems on it , its abble to do lot of missions but not be the better in a lot.
 
F-35 is a game changer. It recently changed the face of the ME, even, if you read under the line, turning null and void and entire international agreement around nuclear weapons.
Even if you are a politician that don't know anything about aerospace, that thing for sure appeals to you.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Corruption along with a dollop of incompetence, plain and simple.
Click to expand...
ALso the fact that the F22 is very much a one trick pony.

AKA Air Superiority and that it for that air frame.

Sure it can drop a set of bombs, but the F35 can do heavier bombs AND carry a set of AMRAAMs while stealthed AT LONGER RANGE.

The F22 is a good plane, problem was it came at the wrong time (peace divided) in a far too of a specialized, and limited role to excel like it should.

The F35 does have more range then the two PRIMARY PLANES it replaces.

The F16 without drop and CFT has a max combat range of 340 miles give or take twenty miles.

While the FA18 hornets in similar set ups are barely better at 390 miles combat range.

Compare to the F35b, the VTOL Lightning, the version with the worse range of the lot, Has 500 miles...

The other two versions are pushing 670 miles, basically 200 to 300 miles more range clean. And the F35 clean means 6 AIM120s or 2 Aim120s and two 2000 pound bombs in the damn bays.

OH and the F22 clean subsonic full endurance mode, maxs out at 590 miles in radius with supercruise dropping it down to 460.

Again this is the COMBAT radius.

AKA can go from the target, bugger around, and come back in this distance with an useful load without tanker support.

And the F35a/cs have more range the most of the fighters types in the FORCE! The only one that has more are the F-15E/EXs at about 880 miles.

Honestly the speed can be fix by adding a proper intake ramps instead of those speed bumps so it can properly use the full power of the engine, then it have some proper get up and go.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Corruption along with a dollop of incompetence, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

The kinematic deficiencies are derived by including the Marines in the program. The requirement that it fit on a amphib deck elevator set a maximum on length and combined with the range requirements made the aerodynamics suffer. The STOVL requirement also limited to it one engine, though I'd argue airframe shape was the bigger liability.

ETA: the mediocre acceleration and top speed aside, the avionics are obviously world class and everyone is rushing to become part of the program.
 
From my limited understanding it seems that if Lockheed was able to use the delta wing configuration they originally wanted the length limitations imposed by the USMC's requirements wouldn't have had as much an impact. So perhaps the addition of a CATOBAR variant for the USN at a later stage is more to blame for lackluster performance in those areas than the USMC's involvement.

Alternatively I suppose the CTOL and CATOBAR variants could have had a stretched fuselage but "commonality" was the favorite buzzword of the day.
 
Josh_TN said:
Grey Havoc said:
Corruption along with a dollop of incompetence, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

The kinematic deficiencies are derived by including the Marines in the program. The requirement that it fit on a amphib deck elevator set a maximum on length and combined with the range requirements made the aerodynamics suffer. The STOVL requirement also limited to it one engine, though I'd argue airframe shape was the bigger liability.

ETA: the mediocre acceleration and top speed aside,
Click to expand...
Compared to what? In what condition?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom