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

_Del_ said:
Strategy of Denial was a pretty good read.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I certainly hope that Hegseth is a front facing leader who will be the public face of the DoD with Colby as the behind the scenes orchestrator of reform. Whether there is or isn't an increase in the top line, Colby will ensure spending is prioritized for the China fight.

We need to build more ships and we need to halt the decline of the Air Force. Proceedings has a good series this month on shipbuilding. Takeaway - we don't necessarily need more shipyards. EB and Newport News were able to deliver 3 subs per year during the Reagan build up. What is needed is steady funding and a demand signal from Congress that the nation wants a larger Navy and will pay for it. It will take time to replace the experience worker which were lost.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2025/february/shipbuilding-deep-dive

The call to increase defense spending by $150 billion is encouraging. I was surprised by that Chris Servello on the Defense and Aeropsace Podcast said the services are unsure of how to spend it? That is pretty pathetic. How about restarting AETP for the F-35/C? Increasing AF production of the F-35 to 72? Buying spare parts. Buying more munitions? Is the industrial base that bad of a shape that it can't absorb that kind of money?
 
B2Blain said:
Agreed. I certainly hope that Hegseth is a front facing leader who will be the public face of the DoD with Colby as the behind the scenes orchestrator of reform. Whether there is or isn't an increase in the top line, Colby will ensure spending is prioritized for the China fight.

We need to build more ships and we need to halt the decline of the Air Force. Proceedings has a good series this month on shipbuilding. Takeaway - we don't necessarily need more shipyards. EB and Newport News were able to deliver 3 subs per year during the Reagan build up. What is needed is steady funding and a demand signal from Congress that the nation wants a larger Navy and will pay for it. It will take time to replace the experience worker which were lost.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2025/february/shipbuilding-deep-dive

The call to increase defense spending by $150 billion is encouraging. I was surprised by that Chris Servello on the Defense and Aeropsace Podcast said the services are unsure of how to spend it? That is pretty pathetic. How about restarting AETP for the F-35/C? Increasing AF production of the F-35 to 72? Buying spare parts. Buying more munitions? Is the industrial base that bad of a shape that it can't absorb that kind of money?
Click to expand...
That will more than likely happen soon, I think the US aristocracy is finally realizing there is no reconciling with China and they need an "all-of-state" approach to compete with them. The US Navy & Air Force are going to get some much needed love.
 
Desertfox said:
For the next 5 years... that will do wonders for NGAD and F/A-XX...
Click to expand...
It's good if it will force them to focus on acquisition and a cheaper "business model". Nothing else will.
 
_Del_ said:
It's good if it will force them to focus on acquisition and a cheaper "business model". Nothing else will.
Click to expand...
CRs have already forced the military to spend less than they want and a "cheaper" business model hasn't appeared...

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...-annual-8-cut-to-defense-budget-through-2030/

"Seventeen categories would be exempt from the budget reductions, including military operations at the southern U.S. border, nuclear weapons and missile defense programs, and acquisition of certain drones and munitions."

If this happens, NGAD is dead... while we spend money on unnecessary things...
 
Desertfox said:
If this happens, NGAD is dead... while we spend money on unnecessary things...
Click to expand...
They already couldn't afford a fleet of their next NGAD design. That's why they stopped before proceeding to throw good money after bad.

The air dominance mission will continue, I assure you.
 
dark sidius said:
It is a non sens you can't do the domination politic that the new administration want to do with a 8 % cut in defense spending.
Click to expand...
Well, the decision-makers looking at the data clearly disagree with your incredibly well-informed opinion.
 
dark sidius said:
8% cut in the face of China growing capacity and Russia ready to war , my opinion is this is dangerous.
Click to expand...
China's production capacity is exactly why they have to break the paradigm. Even full funding toward the manned-NGAD element would not change the equation.

If you want to stop China, you have to be able to make the price too high. We cannot currently do that. Any protracted action and we run out of everything including missiles and bombs in a matter of weeks.

You need mass. If you can't produce ordinance faster than you can shoot it or produce NGAD, F-35, etc faster than they are destroyed in the air or on the ground, you're screwed. We cannot do that. More complicated and expensive NGAD doesn't change the equation.

We need to build off new first principles if we're going to right the ship.
 
_Del_ said:
China's production capacity is exactly why they have to break the paradigm. Even full funding toward the manned-NGAD element would not change the equation.

If you want to stop China, you have to be able to make the price too high. We cannot currently do that. Any protracted action and we run out of everything including missiles and bombs in a matter of weeks.

You need mass. If you can't produce ordinance faster than you can shoot it or produce NGAD, F-35, etc faster than they are destroyed in the air or on the ground, you're screwed. We cannot do that. More complicated and expensive NGAD doesn't change the equation.

We need to build off new first principles if we're going to right the ship.
Click to expand...
You are right for sure but on what they can reduce 8%
 
dark sidius said:
You are right for sure but on what they can reduce 8%
Click to expand...
A LOT. Despite all the talk about our recapitalization needs and our air frames being rode hard and put up wet, "they" continually spend more on R&D programs than acquisition. Makes no sense. R&D gives the least return for the money, and they often point it in the directions that make the least sense (for the Air Force as a policy instrument -- works great for the defense industry shareholders, which is why all these generals end up on a board at RTX or LM or wherever after retirement).
 
_Del_ said:
China's production capacity is exactly why they have to break the paradigm. Even full funding toward the manned-NGAD element would not change the equation.

If you want to stop China, you have to be able to make the price too high. We cannot currently do that. Any protracted action and we run out of everything including missiles and bombs in a matter of weeks.

You need mass. If you can't produce ordinance faster than you can shoot it or produce NGAD, F-35, etc faster than they are destroyed in the air or on the ground, you're screwed. We cannot do that. More complicated and expensive NGAD doesn't change the equation.

We need to build off new first principles if we're going to right the ship.
Click to expand...
Do you think we start to see the end of the tactical aviation in favor of , long range missile ,missile defense, hypersonic attack missile and drones , B-21 bomber, space weapons? etc....
 
www.geaerospace.com

GE Aerospace Completes Detailed Design Review of Adaptive Cycle Engine for U.S. Air Force | GE Aerospace News

CINCINNATI – February 19, 2025 – GE Aerospace announced today the successful completion of the Detailed Design Review (DDR) for its XA102 adaptive cycle engine, a critical milestone in support of the U.S. Air Force’s Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program. With the DDR now complete...
www.geaerospace.com www.geaerospace.com

February 19, 2025 – GE Aerospace announced today the successful completion of the Detailed Design Review (DDR) for its XA102 adaptive cycle engine, a critical milestone in support of the U.S. Air Force’s Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program. With the DDR now complete, GE Aerospace has been awarded the next contract phase to procure, assemble and test an XA102 full scale demonstrator engine.
Click to expand...
 
raptor82 said:
www.geaerospace.com

GE Aerospace Completes Detailed Design Review of Adaptive Cycle Engine for U.S. Air Force | GE Aerospace News

CINCINNATI – February 19, 2025 – GE Aerospace announced today the successful completion of the Detailed Design Review (DDR) for its XA102 adaptive cycle engine, a critical milestone in support of the U.S. Air Force’s Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program. With the DDR now complete...
www.geaerospace.com www.geaerospace.com
Click to expand...
Why invest in it if NGAD is compromise ?
 
dark sidius said:
Why invest in it if NGAD is compromise ?
Click to expand...
Because it has applications beyond the current form of NGAD? Also, experience and data they could apply to XA101 or a follow-up re-engine program if it ever gets revived.
 
_Del_ said:
Because it has applications beyond the current form of NGAD? Also, experience and data they could apply to XA101 or a follow-up re-engine program if it ever gets revived.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the DOD, USAF and USN are looking at various platforms and missions for the adaptive cycle tech. Fighter, strike, ISR, etc.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom