USAF/USN 6th Gen Fighters - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA, ASFS News & Analysis [2008- 2025]

[bobbymike]

Tangentially related?

https://aviationweek.com/shows-even...ockheed-unveils-speed-racer-uas-prove-digital

 

[Flyaway]

The DOD could do worse than going to Space X as look at the way are developing Starship through rapid prototyping of real world vehicles.

 

[doggedman]

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?

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.

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.

If there was a large award (like an X-32 or X-35), I think that would have shown up when the company that built it reported their backlog. This happened with NOC a few years ago which later lead the the speculation of the RQ-180. I tend to believe that this was a proof of concept vehicle (what Roper referred to) and not the result of a full fledged competition. I think that a fly off (digitally or with actual prototypes) is still coming.

 

[doggedman]

I also believe, and correct me, that in the past, the Government has committed to technololgy risk reduction with far less than the demands created by NGAD.

 

[quellish]

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.

At least as I know it, "sub scale" would mean reduced in physical scale. For example, BFF and X-56 were sub scale. The configuration was retained by they were physically smaller than the 200' wingspan "product" (which was a Lockheed QUARTZ configuration that had flutter issues).

Bird Of Prey and Have Blue, as I know it, were not sub scale. They were demonstrators validating specific things, but did not represent any larger product. They were small, and focused, but were not a scaled down version of anything.

 

[marauder2048]

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.

At least as I know it, "sub scale" would mean reduced in physical scale. For example, BFF and X-56 were sub scale. The configuration was retained by they were physically smaller than the 200' wingspan "product" (which was a Lockheed QUARTZ configuration that had flutter issues).

Bird Of Prey and Have Blue, as I know it, were not sub scale. They were demonstrators validating specific things, but did not represent any larger product. They were small, and focused, but were not a scaled down version of anything.

Have Blue was described in an AFA article from 1992 as sub-scale; 40% the size of what became the F-117.

Bird of Prey has been described as "sub scale" (don't know the origin) as in what they were testing was not at the scale of anything
that would go into an operational environment.

 

[marauder2048]

If there was a large award (like an X-32 or X-35), I think that would have shown up when the company that built it reported their backlog.

The recent, acknowledged portion of the revenues made up by restricted/classified work is around 25% for the primes
in some cases. That's many billions. With pardonable exaggeration, even if you nearly DOD-fixed-wing
inflation adjusted the ATF Dem/Val contracts it would fall almost into the noise for say, Lockheed Martin aeronautics.

This happened with NOC a few years ago which later lead the the speculation of the RQ-180.

The only thing stealthier than the RQ-180 is the alleged bump in their restricted bookings in the time it was
supposed to have happened.

 

[doggedman]

No stealthiness about it. NOC did report a sharp increase in bookings and when asked about it by Josepth Nadol of JP Morgan, refused comment.

 

[marauder2048]

No stealthiness about it. NOC did report a sharp increase in bookings and when asked about it by Josepth Nadol of JP Morgan, refused comment.

He died in 2015 which was before you would expect to see a sharp increase.
And NOC refused to talk about a restricted booking? Well that must be RQ-180.

Prior to 2015, the big thing was the LRS-B TD contract.

 

[doggedman]

He (Joe) died in 2015 in a train accident while traveling home. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "before you would expect to see a sharp increase". Joe asked about the substantial increase in backlog and Ken Bedingfield would not comment. He was asked again about it, and would not comment. Speaking with Steve Movius after after the call, they offered no other comment about the booking other than to say it was classified. At some point after the reported increase in backlog, it was used to fuel speculation about the RQ-180 which, I believe, was entirely based on an Avation Week article on the topic (someone else may have speculated on it, I don't know).

 

[marauder2048]

He (Joe) died in 2015 in a train accident while traveling home. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "before you would expect to see a sharp increase". Joe asked about the substantial increase in backlog and Ken Bedingfield would not comment. He was asked again about it, and would not comment. Speaking with Steve Movius after after the call, they offered no other comment about the booking other than to say it was classified. At some point after the reported increase in backlog, it was used to fuel speculation about the RQ-180 which, I believe, was entirely based on an Avation Week article on the topic (someone else may have speculated on it, I don't know).

The large contract that was awarded during the period (pre-2015) that nobody knew about until the LRS-B protest in 2016 was the LRS-B TD contract.

For a contract that would be an EMD type contract with small fixed-price production, NG's profit and revenue profile would look totally different
particularly on or after 2015.

 

[doggedman]

Joe was killed in May 2015. If memory serves, the LRS-B contract was awarded in 4Q15 - maybe October. The LRS-B award was clearly made after Joe's death. Also, LRS-B was a 'white word' contract. This booking was never associated with any specific program.

 

[marauder2048]

Joe was killed in May 2015. If memory serves, the LRS-B contract was awarded in 4Q15 - maybe October. The LRS-B award was clearly made after Joe's death. Also, LRS-B was a 'white word' contract. This booking was never associated with any specific program.

The LRS-B *EMD* contract was awarded, with much public fanfare, to Northrop Grumman in October 2015.
The LRS-B *TD* contracts were awarded, with no notice whatsoever, to Boeing, Lockheed and Northrop in March of 2012*

LRS-B is an acknowledged Special Access Program.

The TD contracts were, so far as I can find, not announced publicly; they aren't on DOD's contract website and I can't
find any contemporary descriptions and nothing until the GAO protest was published in Feb. 2016.

* GAO also says:

Following cancellation of the Next Generation Bomber [me: in 2009], the Air Force continued to provide funding to
Boeing, Northrop, and Lockheed, under separate contracts for additional long range strike aircraft risk reduction
and cost savings efforts <redacted>

 

[doggedman]

The initial LRS-B funding (in 2012) was $3.7B over 5 years and roughly $200M in the year it was awarded. The increase in bookings NOC reported (that I am referring to) was well in excess of the entire Obama administration request. While LRS-B was SAP, it was an acknowledged and White World program that required Special Access to work on. The booking I am referring to was not an acknowledged program and NOC made that clear.

 

[marauder2048]

The initial LRS-B funding (in 2012) was $3.7B over 5 years and roughly $200M in the year it was awarded. The increase in bookings NOC reported (that I am referring to) was well in excess of the entire Obama administration request. While LRS-B was SAP, it was an acknowledged and White World program that required Special Access to work on. The booking I am referring to was not an acknowledged program and NOC made that clear.

Well aside from the fact that LRS showed up in FY2011...
Find an example pre-2015 of NG attributing any revenue to "long range strike" restricted.
And of course the FY2012 funding would not include the NGB funding that continued post-2009.

And if you look at NG aerospace revenue through the entire period there are no dramatic leaps forward as you allege.

 

[doggedman]

I’ve looked at NOC revs since 2002 and I am not sure why you would expect to see a stair step increase if a booking was over a 7-10 year period

 

[marauder2048]

I’ve looked at NOC revs since 2002 and I am not sure why you would expect to see a stair step increase if a booking was over a 7-10 year period

NG's 2016 aerospace revenue and profit margin profile looks exactly like you would expect it to look with a big EMD contract.
Coincidentally, that's the year, due to the GAO protest, they were awarded the LRS-B contract.

But feel free to answer the questions posed. The notional claimed RQ-180 development period cannot be reconciled with NG's
revenue and profit margin profile during the same period. Of course, AvWeek double dipped in saying that 2008 restricted
also bought a "bomber demonstrator." So we'll keep our eyes peeled for a bomber demonstrator and a VLO HALE drone.

But in the intervening 12 years...there's been nothing.

 

[doggedman]

Could you please tell me how you know there has been nothing? Are you certain of this? If so, then OK.

 

[marauder2048]

Could you please tell me how you know there has been nothing? Are you certain of this? If so, then OK.

What didn't happen in infinite and consequently impossible to prove.
What did happen is finite and thus your burden of proof.

 

[doggedman]

Huh? I'm missing this. Long day. You made the claim there has been nothing in the intervening 12 years. OK, I'm fine with that claim. Are you sure about that? Do I take it that you would like me to disprove your claim?

 

[marauder2048]

Huh? I'm missing this. Long day. You made the claim there has been nothing in the intervening 12 years. OK, I'm fine with that claim. Are you sure about that? Do I take it that you would like me to disprove your claim?

Others are making the claim that something (specifically a bomber demonstrator and a VLO HALE drone) happened.
It's their burden of proof to substantiate those claims.

My point is: it's nearly impossible to prove that something didn't happen or that something doesn't exist.
That's the beauty of these "black aircraft" for those perpetrating them; they are plausible and don't typically violate the laws
of engineering and physics.

 

[doggedman]

OK. You certainly are making some good points. But I do think we may be drifting a bit from the points I was making. My intent was to state:

1. I think one possiblity for the 6th generation fighter demonstrator Roper referred to is to demonstrate printing an airplane.
2. I don't think this is a large program similar to the X-32/X-35 because it would have shown up in the backlog of the company when they reported.
3. I'm using NOC booking a large classified (and black) program as an example of where it would have shown up.
4. The NOC booking I am referring to was not LRS-B which had always been a white and acknowledged program.
5. I think the NOC booking led to speculation at a later time about the RQ-180 by aviation week or whoever was speculating on it.

 

[rooster]

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.

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.

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.

I find a "plugged" delta winged F-22 way more palatable than an even heavier and bigger f35. At least there is plenty of excess thrust to offset weight gain with stock engines and its already setup for TV. But I am glad to see quellish agreeing about bird of prey analogies.

 

[helmutkohl]

Beloved piloted X-36

I would love to see this so bad

Boeing's loyal wingman still keeps some of the elements from McDs JAST and X-36

 

[rooster]

Huh? I'm missing this. Long day. You made the claim there has been nothing in the intervening 12 years. OK, I'm fine with that claim. Are you sure about that? Do I take it that you would like me to disprove your claim?

Others are making the claim that something (specifically a bomber demonstrator and a VLO HALE drone) happened.
It's their burden of proof to substantiate those claims.

My point is: it's nearly impossible to prove that something didn't happen or that something doesn't exist.
That's the beauty of these "black aircraft" for those perpetrating them; they are plausible and don't typically violate the laws
of engineering and physics.

Its pretty hard to prove black aircraft exist as thank god there are loyal patriotic engineers in this country. This isn't like looking for the higgs particle or proving something is vacuously true. Its silly to talk about burden of proof given there is a long established history or black aircraft.

Its as if every time something is revealed (like bird of prey) many people here think "ok that's it they can't build anything ever again without me knowing about it." we keep plenty of secrets inside automotive engineering and we don't have facilities buried behind mountain ranges. A decent hacker skilled at sniffing signals can publish plenty of our secrets...

 

[quellish]

Have Blue was described in an AFA article from 1992 as sub-scale; 40% the size of what became the F-117.

Bird of Prey has been described as "sub scale" (don't know the origin) as in what they were testing was not at the scale of anything
that would go into an operational environment.

F-117 was a scaled up Have Blue, not the other way around.
I have never heard of Bird Of Prey being sub scale, it was a demonstrator for several different concepts and was intended to represent a notional daylight stealth platform.

 

[quellish]

Its pretty hard to prove black aircraft exist as thank god there are loyal patriotic engineers in this country.

Not really, though I guess it depends on what your definition of "hard" is. Money, resources, etc. have to come from somewhere. You can't hide everything.

 

[quellish]

4. The NOC booking I am referring to was not LRS-B which had always been a white and acknowledged program.

LRS-B was an acknowledged special access program.
Portions of NGAD are special access programs, and NGAD program details are classified.

 

[Bhurki]

USAF classified R&D and procurement funding was estimated by Jane's to be about $232B over Fy20-24, thats plenty of money to do black/grey projects on a large scale.

Just to put things about funding into perspective -

 

[quellish]

USAF classified R&D and procurement funding was estimated by Jane's to be about $232B over Fy20-24, thats plenty of money to do black/grey projects on a large scale.

Using "the black budget" as a MacGuffin to explain things gets a little old and tiring. There's a ton of money there! They must have Aurora/RQ-180/X-71/All Of The Above!

Again, the bulk of this is "mundane" things. Jane's is just listed what the AF puts into the "Classified Programs" line in the budget. They're not actually doing the accounting to look for classified programs within other programs. For example, hypothetically there may be a program within NGAD that is a special access program. Jane's could have found that program by adding up the total $ for acknowledged programs within the NGAD program element and seeing if there was a difference from the total.
They didn't.

So what's in the "Classified Programs"?
For a given (recent) year which shall remain nameless the breakdown for RDTE Classified Programs looked like:

Program 1: $7.6b (Hint: Not Aurora, closer to X-71)
Program 2: $1.4b
Program 3: $1.2b
Program 4: $1.1b
Program 5: $650m
Program 6: $370m
Program 7: $54m

And that was about it. Who can guess what these programs were?
$7b for helium for a secret airship? $1.4b to produce liquid methane for Aurora? $1.2b to investigate UFOs? $54m for an "RQ-180"?

 

[Sferrin]

Have Blue was described in an AFA article from 1992 as sub-scale; 40% the size of what became the F-117.

Bird of Prey has been described as "sub scale" (don't know the origin) as in what they were testing was not at the scale of anything
that would go into an operational environment.

F-117 was a scaled up Have Blue, not the other way around.
I have never heard of Bird Of Prey being sub scale, it was a demonstrator for several different concepts and was intended to represent a notional daylight stealth platform.

I didn't say any of that. Also, you and Marauder are saying the same thing re the F-117.

 

[Sferrin]

They're not printing airplanes anytime soon. (Not the kind they want to keep around anyway.)

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/lockheed-martin-skunkworks-p-175-polecat-uav.501/

" Engineers designed Polecat using 98% composites, aside from landing gear, avionics and engines, and it consists of fewer than 200 parts--all to bring costs down. They used an innovative, low-temperature composite curing process for the vehicle. Normally cured at 350F in an autoclave, the new technique relies on a 150F curing process that eliminates the need for investing in autoclaves. The composites are then post-cured. These are further iterations of processes used in the F-22, F-35 and Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile programs. "

That sounds like they're just minimizing the number of parts by combining them, not 3D printing them. (Large panels, co-cured structures, etc.)

 

[dark sidius]

What is X-71 ?

 

[sublight_]

$7b for helium for a secret airship?

Hydrogen is a cheaper liftgas and you get more buoyancy .

 

[Sferrin]

$7b for helium for a secret airship?

Hydrogen is a cheaper liftgas and you get more buoyancy .

But you know what the "exploding Bradley" people will say.

 

[dark sidius]

Never heard X-71 designation...

 

[quellish]

Never heard X-71 designation...

 

[In_A_Dream]

Air Force 73rd Birthday Graphic Features Rendering Of A Mysterious Next Generation Aircraft
If you look closely, it looks as if there are overlays of several aircraft on the same graphic (one is the obvious delta shape, the other looks sleeker).

 

[Grey Havoc]

VG design?

 

[seruriermarshal]

Seems like