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

Status
Not open for further replies.
FighterJock said:
Exactly DrRansom, I would want between 400 to 500 NGADs but that all depends on who the next president will be, whether the military will get enough funding for such numbers after the next election.
Click to expand...
I don't wanna talk political, but whatever party the President belongs to might play a factor in how many NGADS (And any other upcoming Military technologies) that we'll get. However, given the recent events of the past 3 decades, that prior point might be moot, as no matter whether the president is a Republican or a Democraft, the United State's military prowress wasn't really negatively affected or stunted by any political actions since either the Vietnam War or the End of the Cold War. If there are any changes, it's mostly positive and contributing to any kind of military and technology buildup.

I think 500 should be the bare minimum during a crisis that may change the status quo, but there should be provisions for more should we allow it. But I'm also of the opinion that there should be 5 or more Drones per NGAD, so if a single drone would have the same capability and weapon load as a F-22, then a fewer number of NGAD units is acceptable because in that case, a single NGAD and its squad of Loyal Wingmen Drones would be equivalent to a squadron on deployment, and thus save some "precious" money and other NGAD units to be used elsewhere or become demonstrators or users for upcoming technological advancements beyond those of the NGAD.

Either ways, I'm doubtful that Biden would be President the moment the NGAD will be unveiled. Even if he wins 2024, the NGAD probably wouldn't be deployed until the 2030s, and that's almost 2 years after his possible second term will expire.
 
Last edited:
FighterJock said:
DrRansom said:
If the US has 200 NGADs, it doesn't matter if China is a generation - or two - behind. The numbers are simply not enough.
Click to expand...

Exactly DrRansom, I would want between 400 to 500 NGADs but that all depends on who the next president will be, whether the military will get enough funding for such numbers after the next election.
Click to expand...

The outstanding lesson of Ukraine is that everybody needs more. With runway cratering cruise-missiles going for <$100k USD, a small airplane force runs the risk of being caught on the ground and destroyed. A few blown Rapid Raptor missions (inevitable in war) and you've lost 10-20% of your force.

What I get from the whole concept is just inadequacy, a clear lack of vision or, if they have a vision, a vision which simply won't work. To compete against China, the US needs: NGAD (mainly for bomber escort), a F-15EX/F-111 cruise missile carrier (STOL preferable), a 4+ gen (STOL preferable) rear-area fighter, and all the UCAVs money can find. Instead we have a boutique force pursuing some 'technological overmatch.' It's a recipe for defeat.
 
trose213 said:
Colonial-Marine said:
NATF reboot.
Click to expand...
Stealth not needed in this concept
Click to expand...

Exactly, trade stealth for numbers, lower CPFH, and ability to operate off "rougher" runways and highways without mission degradation. And - with a cheaper more numerous airplanes, keeps a large pilot pool which can be cycled up to bombers / penetrating NGAD if high-production is required. (Also non-stealthy will be much easier to ramp up production)

But the plan for 200 NGAD and 1000 ill-defined drones is just bizarre. It assumes some magical combat ability that'll overcome numbers, distance, and enemy stand-off precision attacks.
 
The USAF has been moaning about the vulnerability of long concrete runways since the 1970s and done naff all about reducing its reliance on them.

Has the F-35B ever done VTOL on a non-concrete/steel surface?
 
trose213 said:
Colonial-Marine said:
NATF reboot.
Click to expand...
Stealth not needed in this concept
Click to expand...
Unless you build some edge-level stealth (where you indeed pay a lot for new levels of sneakiness), there is literally no reason to develop a non-stealthy airframe when you already have the know-how how to get a stealthy one.
Modelling, verification, and production techniques are already here.
Just drop out the maintenance-heavy parts of it, as of now they still aren't the main component of RCS reduction anyways.
 
What about adding an ultra long range air-air missile to the mix? Something like what the Russians have in the R-37, such a missile would be good for the USAF in those types of situations.
 
DrRansom said:
Exactly, trade stealth for numbers, lower CPFH, and ability to operate off "rougher" runways and highways without mission degradation. And - with a cheaper more numerous airplanes, keeps a large pilot pool which can be cycled up to bombers / penetrating NGAD if high-production is required. (Also non-stealthy will be much easier to ramp up production)
Click to expand...
The F-35 and F-22 are both bleeding edge stealth fighters and still are. You can incorporate RCS reduction like they're trying to do on the KF-21 without building a stealth fighter.
 
jsport said:
NeilChapman said:
seruriermarshal said:
How A Phantom Works Project Fits The Secretive NGAD Profile
Steve Trimble February 27, 2023

View attachment 694546

The Weekly Debrief: How A Phantom Works Project Fits The Secretive NGAD Profile | Aviation Week Network

What is the “Voodoo II”? And why does the Voodoo II project’s special patch say “Two-0-Thunder”?
aviationweek.com aviationweek.com
Click to expand...

Please don't let Boeing muck up another program...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
This entire reliance on cheap drones will to down in history as the nail in coffin on the usaf. I work on a unmanned project and if this is the future of air dominance then good night air superiority. God help us if the Navy screws it up as well and we can't even buy a naval fighter like we did with the phantom. its like we're planning on losing a war. If they we're going to buy 400 of the ngad, I'd say sure, fine, whatever. But they're not even buying that minimum requirement to replace all the f22s and f15c\d. These cheap drones have a place but its not this capstone. They never heard of the concept start small and build on successive successes
 
trose213 said:
The F-35 and F-22 are both bleeding edge stealth fighters and still are.
Click to expand...

They are really not.
Capabilities have changed dramatically since these aircraft were being developed. Manufacturing techniques in particular have advanced considerably, which has resulted in dramatic practical RCS reduction.

Polecat is a relevant example. Large, precisely manufactured single piece composites that reduced complexity.
 
quellish said:
trose213 said:
The F-35 and F-22 are both bleeding edge stealth fighters and still are.
Click to expand...

They are really not.
Capabilities have changed dramatically since these aircraft were being developed. Manufacturing techniques in particular have advanced considerably, which has resulted in dramatic practical RCS reduction.

Polecat is a relevant example. Large, precisely manufactured single piece composites that reduced complexity.
Click to expand...
Which is probably why the USAF is proceeding with certain high-end upgrades and block developments for the F-35, if Sandboxx is correct:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SNALUoybt0

And that's also why the NGAD is being developed, among other reasons. Though it's possible that the NGAD in all its advanced upcoming glory, will be rendered technologically obsolete if technology continues to accelerate much faster than it is currently at right now .
 
La-Fuente Technologies said:
Though it's possible that the NGAD in all its advanced upcoming glory, will be rendered technologically obsolete if technology continues to accelerate much faster than it is currently at right now .
Click to expand...

That is why the NGAD should come with some form of upgradability built in so that if any new technology comes out in the future the USAF can swap out the old tech with no issues. Think of it as a flying desktop PC.
 
NGAD is first realisation of agile doctrine - 10-15 years span between iterations using mainly 3d printing. 200 is an sustainable fleet that in 10 years will be supported by first 7th gen airframe.
 
La-Fuente Technologies said:
Which is probably why the USAF is proceeding with certain high-end upgrades and block developments for the F-35, if Sandboxx is correct
Click to expand...

Are they changing the outer mold line significantly? Nope.
 
FighterJock said:
TomcatViP said:
Well, probably something like tooling, long lead material etc...
Click to expand...

I do not see the NGAD appearing anytime soon at least in hardware form.
Click to expand...

This link could also fit in other topics, but...
www.airandspaceforces.com

In 2024 Budget, USAF Pushes Major New Aircraft Starts | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force (USAF) pursues multiple new aircraft in fiscal 2024 budget, including CCAs, tankers, a new AWACS, bombers, and fighters.
www.airandspaceforces.com www.airandspaceforces.com

"Production of CCAs is planned before the end of the decade, Kendall said, with initial operational capability projected to be roughly comparable to the NGAD fighter despite entering development later. "

(I know this is about the Airforce´s NGAD-fighter & CCAs and not about the Navy´s F/A-XX and it´s CCAs. I´ll leave it to others to guesstimate which service might be ahead or behind the other regarding NGAD.)
 
Last edited:
FighterJock said:
La-Fuente Technologies said:
Though it's possible that the NGAD in all its advanced upcoming glory, will be rendered technologically obsolete if technology continues to accelerate much faster than it is currently at right now .
Click to expand...

That is why the NGAD should come with some form of upgradability built in so that if any new technology comes out in the future the USAF can swap out the old tech with no issues. Think of it as a flying desktop PC.
Click to expand...
Yeah, modularity seems to be the current technology game of the US Military as of recent. The B-21 Raider is also considered to be modular, and The US Navy's DDG(X) is also planned to be modular as well, so it won't be a surprise if the NGAD does come with upgradability. But it also seems that based from some other news and discussions, that the NGAD will also have a shorter service lifespan so that any upgrades will be placed on newer and better airframes instead of existing ones.

quellish said:
Are they changing the outer mold line significantly? Nope.
Click to expand...
I mean yeah, it's mostly software and capability upgrades. The only physical upgrade is a modified bomb bay to hold an additional 2 weapons, making it carry 6 weapons instead of 4, and even that's mostly internal work. It doesn't have to be an outright physical change, just mostly an internal one.
 
Last edited:
www.popularmechanics.com

The Navy Declassified Its Demands for a Next-Gen Fighter Jet

The secretive F/A-XX will replace the Super Hornet.
www.popularmechanics.com www.popularmechanics.com

www.forbes.com

Air Force And Space Force On Right Vector—But Need More Resources To Meet Defense Strategy

Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall’s first budget built entirely under his direction does a fine job of underwriting Air Force and Space Force capabilities. But the demands on the Air Force Department still far exceed the resources it is allocated.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
Last edited:
www.airandspaceforces.com

Kendall: Air Force Wants as Many as 2,000 CCAs with a Common, Modular Airframe

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall says he wants potentially 2,000 Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCAs) based on a single, modular airframe
www.airandspaceforces.com www.airandspaceforces.com

"The Air Force is looking for a single airframe on which to build its Collaborative Combat Aircraft concept, with interchangeable, modular elements, service Secretary Frank Kendall said March 15. And while he has set 1,000 as the 'planning number" for the new class of combat aircraft, the true requirement could be twice that, he said.
...
"Kendall said in a briefing ahead of the budget release that the plan will be to carry two CCA airframe concepts through initial development, but he couldn’t say on what timeline the Air Force will select one type for production. However, whichever contractor is chosen to build the basic airframe, the Air Force’s intent is to compete the modular payloads thereafter, thus avoiding one companying having “vendor lock” on the CCA fleet."
...
"He emphasized that developing and fielding CCAs will not come at the expense of manned aircraft, but as an enabling adjunct to them."
...
"Last week, Kendall said he expected these aircraft to achieve initial operational capability “by the end of the decade,” and in parallel with the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) family of systems, which will succeed the F-22 in about the same timeframe.
Besides the NGAD and F-35, Kendall said the F-15EX could also conceivably be a 'controlling aircraft' for CCAs."
 
breakingdefense.com

Air Force's future spending outlook shows big jumps for new, marquee weapons - Breaking Defense

Seeking to pivot to a new generation of air power by fielding platforms like the Next Generation Air Dominance Fighter, the Air Force is planning significant investments into future technologies, according to service budget documents, which also show that fiscal 2024 could be a turning point for...
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

ICYMI: NGAD, NGAP and CCAs, FYI

After previewing an approximately $276 million funding increase for NGAD technologies during the service’s budget rollout, the FYDP numbers show that near-term spending on NGAD will more than double by the end of the five-year period, climbing from a request of $1.9 billion in FY24 to roughly $4.1 billion in FY28.

NGAD efforts include development of a secretive, sixth-gen stealth fighter as well as the associated hardware and software to foster a family of systems, the budget documents say. The FY24 spending levels further show the Air Force may be moving more aggressively to develop the fighter than previously anticipated, as FY23 budget documents showed the service was predicting to spend under $1.7 billion in FY24.

It is still unknown what airframe primes are in the running to build the fighter, though Kendall has indicated that the program is well along the way to a down-select.

To power NGAD, the service will also continue developing the fighter’s Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) engine, seeking $595 million in the coming fiscal year. RDT&E spending will finish off in FY27 at a level of $291 million, according the the j-books, which state that “competitive prototyping” work would proceed between FY25 and FY28. Both Pratt & Whitney and General Electric are participating in NGAP, which a top official suggested last year could move to down-select as soon as this year.

And to fight alongside NGAD, the Air Force also wants to significantly ramp up spending on CCA drones. Last year, the Air Force’s FY23 request suggested the service would seek roughly $50 million in FY24 for work to develop the CCA platform, but the service is now asking lawmakers for nearly eight times as much at $392 million. The program’s topline is projected to dip in funding to around $246 million in FY25 but will shoot up to $1.6 billion in FY27 and will approximately double to $3 billion in FY28.

Along with funds for new sensor development, the Air Force is also supplementing CCA efforts with two new starts: one for an Experimental Operations Unit (EOU) that will run risk reduction tasks like generating operational concepts for deployment, and another for expanding autonomy test beds, which an industry executive previously pointed to as a choke point for CCA development.
Click to expand...
 
Same news as before, but from Potomac Officer's Club:

Budget Documents Reveal Air Force Spending Priorities Through 2028

The Department of the Air Force has disclosed documents detailing near-term budget priorities such as the Next Generation Air Dominance stealth fighter and Collaborative Combat Aircraft drone projects, which are part of a broader effort to modernize warfare capabilities. The released documents...
potomacofficersclub.com potomacofficersclub.com

It even cites the prior article from Breaking Defense.
 
jsport said:
breakingdefense.com

Air Force's future spending outlook shows big jumps for new, marquee weapons - Breaking Defense

Seeking to pivot to a new generation of air power by fielding platforms like the Next Generation Air Dominance Fighter, the Air Force is planning significant investments into future technologies, according to service budget documents, which also show that fiscal 2024 could be a turning point for...
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Yep, that's pretty much what's going to happen to the NGAD program now. A big increase in spending, which should lead to some results in the next few years.
 
Interesting development La-Fuente Technologies, I would like to see the spending increased on the NGAD so that the USAF can order many more than there are F-22s at present.
 
Personally, it's great to hear that there is confidence in CCAs. What is critical is that Kendall, and the manufacturers, realize the need for speed.They don't need to last for decades bc one would continue to rapidly iterate. The speed of production, the rapid generation of force projection, will be an excellent deterrent.

You're never going to replace F-35's at greater than 15 - 20 per month. B-21 may be 8 - 16 per year after a three year ramp. But if you select a CCA design that uses inexpensive materials, and an engine that is already in high volume production, you will have the tools to get started.

The RCO would design the program to focus on building a production line that rapidly iterates their CCA proposal. Tell them to model it on SpaceX Starbase. The winner will show they can rapidly iterate and produce a CCA that either meets the requirements, or is on the way to meeting the requirements. Select and fund three or four competitors. I'd give them two years to see how far they get, then cull one. I think it will be obvious who is committed to the job.

Musk tells his workers, 'assume there is a killer asteroid on its way to earth.' I recognize they have digital models but the point here is rapid iteration to speed up production. It will take at least a year or three to ramp production. Using this model will flush out who can make it happen quickest.

You can buy tooling, and you can buy material, but you cannot buy back time.
 
Building the CCA will probably be much easier than any manned aircraft; there are already several promising starting points that would serve as decent baseline platforms. I suspect the harder part will be software development and integration with the manned platforms; I'd imagine the hardware is practically off the shelf and most of the producers of UAVs are generally smaller, more nimble companies that already iterate quite rapidly compared to the last three or so defense companies that produce manned military aircraft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom