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

Desertfox said:
Probably closer to 500 as the USAF is forced to buy them when NGAD goes under.
Click to expand...
That would honestly be a nightmare scenario for USAF. They hate buying Navy planes!



Hydroman said:
Went to Boeing St Louis last week, got to tour the F-15EX line and the EMD MQ-25s. Boeing is still building their huge, new production building and composites center which is and maybe was for NGAD. But as we know, Kendall put the temporary brakes on NGAD. I've been doing aerospace for a very long time and with around 2 years to go (maybe), I still have some shelf life, hard to predict in these times how program awards are going to go. I think Boeing was initially selected for USAF NGAD but with Boeing's current woes, I can see where Kendall hit the pause button. NG may win F/A-XX and I cannot see LM winning USAF NGAD since they have F-22 and there will be a lot more F-35s built. Boeing may still get selected NGAD in order to keep three primes in the game and for years, NG used to be the underdog.
Click to expand...
I still see Boeing winning NGAD to keep 3 primes, and NG getting FAXX.

I'd laugh my ass off if the new Boeing plants end up making parts for LM and NG...


ntexastom said:
www.eurasiantimes.com

6th-Gen Aircraft: U.S. Explores Joining Euro-Japanese GCAP Fighter Program As Its NGAD Is Heading Nowhere

A truly global sixth-generation fighter jet can be in the offing. As financial constraints throw a spanner in the US Air Force and the US Navy’s plan to develop a sixth-generation fighter jet, the US is exploring the option of joining the European-Japanese consortium. The US Air Force and the...
www.eurasiantimes.com www.eurasiantimes.com

U.S. Explores Joining Euro-Japanese GCAP Fighter Program As Its NGAD Is Heading Nowhere​

Possible in current budget environment?
Click to expand...
No, mostly because adding the US would add enormous delays to the program that GCAP cannot afford.


quellish said:
Boeing is very likely to get the Navy contract and they have known that for a while.
Click to expand...
How so?
 
Scott Kenny said:
That would honestly be a nightmare scenario for USAF. They hate buying Navy planes!




I still see Boeing winning NGAD to keep 3 primes, and NG getting FAXX.

I'd laugh my ass off if the new Boeing plants end up making parts for LM and NG...



No, mostly because adding the US would add enormous delays to the program that GCAP cannot afford.



How so?
Click to expand...
The US would have to give up ITAR, that's why Japan did not want to team with the US. Europe does not have similar ITAR restrictions.
 
Boy everybody, these discussions are like a good chess match to see where all this goes or like the game Clue: Col. Boeing killed the competition and did it in the parlor with a rubber chicken then cried fowl!
 
As what was stated by totoro, Boeing does have KC-46 (needs help but USAF already pregnant), T-7 (started good, now issues, Saab not happy), F-15EX (going well, Boeing don't screw it up), P-8 (going well). F-18 E/F, last four birds this year. NG and LM more than likely have new classified programs of various types which is logical and has been that way for a long time. I'm sure Phantom Works is active in the B-World but not to the level of NG and LM. NG has B-21 but there is more, just don't about them.
 
Hydroman said:
As what was stated by totoro, Boeing does have KC-46 (needs help but USAF already pregnant), T-7 (started good, now issues, Saab not happy), F-15EX (going well, Boeing don't screw it up), P-8 (going well). F-18 E/F, last four birds this year.
Click to expand...
Boeing did already screw up with the F-15, the SA variant that the EX is built upon was over two years late to the Saudis in the middle teens.
 
Hydroman said:
As what was stated by totoro, Boeing does have KC-46 (needs help but USAF already pregnant), T-7 (started good, now issues, Saab not happy), F-15EX (going well, Boeing don't screw it up), P-8 (going well). F-18 E/F, last four birds this year. NG and LM more than likely have new classified programs of various types which is logical and has been that way for a long time. I'm sure Phantom Works is active in the B-World but not to the level of NG and LM. NG has B-21 but there is more, just don't about them.
Click to expand...
You have an idea of what NG an LM classified assets could be ? new capacity ?
 

“Game-Changer” – Trump Unleashes the Ultimate F-35 Successor for the US Air Force

IN A NUTSHELL ✈️ The U.S. is considering the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program as a successor to the F-35, with budget and strategic needs under scrutiny. The NGAD family includes the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), an unmanned semi-autonomous aircraft designed as a ‘loyal...
www.sustainability-times.com www.sustainability-times.com
It is realy time to take the decision. When this story will end ? Time to President Trump to go on the decision.
 
dark sidius said:
You have an idea of what NG an LM classified assets could be ? new capacity ?
Click to expand...

If we're referring to budget items reported in their respective Earnings Calls: (IMO) NG is the B-21/RQ-180 (likely) and their respective footprints; LM is NGAD. It looks like they will go with something like Palantir for AI/ML/JADC2 independence from the usual suspects. For the trifecta, Boeing gets the F/A-XX as part of civil-military fusion to get platforms pumping out at maximum rates. I think the new capacity is the Space Force superiority/orbital ISR dominance, applied like a beautiful rug which really ties the room together.
 
VishnuOsiris said:
If we're referring to budget items reported in their respective Earnings Calls: (IMO) NG is the B-21/RQ-180 (likely) and their respective footprints; LM is NGAD. It looks like they will go with something like Palantir for AI/ML/JADC2 independence from the usual suspects. For the trifecta, Boeing gets the F/A-XX as part of civil-military fusion to get platforms pumping out at maximum rates. I think the new capacity is the Space Force superiority/orbital ISR dominance, applied like a beautiful rug which really ties the room together.
Click to expand...
Awesome futur :eek:
 
I'm just putting this out there as food for thought. I'd be very interested in the group's opinion as you all seem quite knowledgeable. Many (many) years ago, a senior individual at NOC said to me, when we were knee deep in the YF-23 competition, that NOC had the bomber (B-2), the missile (TSSAM or Tri-Service Stand-Off Attack Missile), and therefore, there was no way the Pentagon would award NOC the fighter (the YF-23 competing with the YF-22). Today, NOC has the bomber (the B-21) and the missile (Sentinel). Does anyone think history could repeat itself with respect to NGAD (or F/A-XX)? All the eggs, basket, etc.
 
doggedman said:
I'm just putting this out there as food for thought. I'd be very interested in the group's opinion as you all seem quite knowledgeable. Many (many) years ago, a senior individual at NOC said to me, when we were knee deep in the YF-23 competition, that NOC had the bomber (B-2), the missile (TSSAM or Tri-Service Stand-Off Attack Missile), and therefore, there was no way the Pentagon would award NOC the fighter (the YF-23 competing with the YF-22). Today, NOC has the bomber (the B-21) and the missile (Sentinel). Does anyone think history could repeat itself with respect to NGAD (or F/A-XX)? All the eggs, basket, etc.
Click to expand...
Sustaining and protecting industry can be used to support the decision for one vendor over another. Today though the landscape is very different to what it was in the early 90s including the last supper held in 1993.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1623766840450195456
View: https://x.com/RepDeluzio/status/1623766840450195456/photo/1


What that ultimately means is that there are a limited number of suppliers today and that translates to some primes being subcontractors to others. ie with the F-35 NG is a significant supplier, for the F-22 Boeing is/was a significant supplier etc. Could easily see the same thing happening with F/A-XX and NGAD. For example with LM now out of F/A-XX they could be used as a supplier to either of the Primes still in the race and if LM won NGAD then they could use NG who withdrew, at least for now, from NGAD.

With CCA there is an obvious intent to broaden the supplier base but for F/A-XX and NGAD only the Primes are in the running. Ideally one vendor won't win both F/A-XX and NGAD. The US DoD also seems keen to maintain two fighter production lines in operation which points to no one vendor making a clean sweep. Additionally hopefully the USAF and USN have learnt from trying to force fixed price contracts on Industry for projects of this size, scope and technological maturity with the probable end result of delayed and descoped capability that results.
 
doggedman said:
I'm just putting this out there as food for thought. I'd be very interested in the group's opinion as you all seem quite knowledgeable. Many (many) years ago, a senior individual at NOC said to me, when we were knee deep in the YF-23 competition, that NOC had the bomber (B-2), the missile (TSSAM or Tri-Service Stand-Off Attack Missile), and therefore, there was no way the Pentagon would award NOC the fighter (the YF-23 competing with the YF-22). Today, NOC has the bomber (the B-21) and the missile (Sentinel). Does anyone think history could repeat itself with respect to NGAD (or F/A-XX)? All the eggs, basket, etc.
Click to expand...
Even though NG has B-21, Sentinel and the still black so-called "RQ-180" which I know is real since I was asked in 2007 if I wanted to return to NG to work on a new black program but the "customer" did not want to go through the entire process to get me cleared since my clearances had been in-active for sometime, which was fine since I was already involved with Stratolaunch Roc during that time. NG could still be in the running for a substantial "known" program win (e.g. F/A-XX). Even though Boeing unfortunately is having major, self-inflicted corporate woes, Boeing still has; KC-46, F-15EX, MQ-25, T-7 and I think P-8 is still in production. Now with that said, NG and LM I'm sure have "other" and probably significant black programs which is logical. This goes from experience when I was with Northrop from 1986 to 1996.
 
I left NOC in 1999. The comment was made at a meeting with Bill Lawler, Len Malthan, Dr. George Grant, and I think Bill Haub was there too (but I'm relying on memory here which is not my strong suit).
 
doggedman said:
I left NOC in 1999. The comment was made at a meeting with Bill Lawler, Len Malthan, Dr. George Grant, and I think Bill Haub was there too (but I'm relying on memory here which is not my strong suit).
Click to expand...
Bill Lawler, that's a blast from the past. At Pico, I remember Jorge Diaz, Doug Woods (FCHIL), Roy Whites, Chris Hernandez and Scott Seymour. At the B-2 CTF, worked with Steve Sullivan.
 
One part about CCAs that doesn't make sense though, the Anduril YFQ-44 carries weapons externally, which will make it unstealthy. So how is it to operate with stealth aircraft like the F-22 or NGAD? Even if they fly at more standoff distances they still more vulnerable to getting picked off. The General Atomics YFQ-42 does have internal weapons bays so that might not be as much of concern.
 
RadicalDisconnect said:
One part about CCAs that doesn't make sense though, the Anduril YFQ-44 carries weapons externally, which will make it unstealthy. So how is it to operate with stealth aircraft like the F-22 or NGAD? Even if they fly at more standoff distances they still more vulnerable to getting picked off. The General Atomics YFQ-42 does have internal weapons bays so that might not be as much of concern.
Click to expand...
That comes down to the CONOPS. Is the expectation the CCAS will fly as wingmen in the traditional sense, will they hunt in autonomous wolf packs etc. Some insightful comments can be found here, https://www.afa.org/app/uploads/202...orative-Combat-Aircraft-CONOPs-Transcript.pdf from the 2023 AFA war symposium, page 8 is a where I think it gets interesting.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom