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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve wondered how much of this would come down to the government giving work to companies who need it just to keep everyone viable. If Northrop is bowing out to focus on the Navy’s program, and Lockheed still has… what? A thousand more F-35s to go through? Whatever the number is, they’re pretty much set for orders, and maybe the government is looking at an adequate Boeing design and saying, “okay, looks like you’re up.”
 
MrTopaz said:
I’ve wondered how much of this would come down to the government giving work to companies who need it just to keep everyone viable. If Northrop is bowing out to focus on the Navy’s program, and Lockheed still has… what? A thousand more F-35s to go through? Whatever the number is, they’re pretty much set for orders, and maybe the government is looking at an adequate Boeing design and saying, “okay, looks like you’re up.”
Click to expand...
There is probably some truth to that. There is already a lack of competition in military aircraft projects, and as much as Boeing is struggling right now, the USAF probably does not want to see it leave the military aircraft business altogether.
 
lantinian said:
Bird of Prey, X-36, F/A-18E/F, F-15EX
Click to expand...
Three of those were McDonnell Douglas so they don't count. As for BoP we don't know the budget or the schedule so that's pure speculation.
 
sferrin said:
Three of those were McDonnell Douglas so they don't count. As for BoP we don't know the budget or the schedule so that's pure speculation.
Click to expand...
Right, because when one companies merges with another, the institutional knowledge and people only migrate when it comes to the commercial side of the business.
 
lantinian said:
Bird of Prey, X-36, F/A-18E/F, F-15EX
Click to expand...
f-15EX was already developed thru the QA program. Bird of Prey, x-36 are just demonstrators.

Look at the delay of a vastly simpler airplane mq-25 to that of the on schedule b-21 program.

Look at the national sham/shame that is the tanker saga.

E-7 to UK - delayed. An aircraft that was largely already developed for Australia (and even that program once faced delay).

Ground Base Midcourse Interceptor - embarassing test failures. MDA had to go back to drawing board.
 
donnage99 said:
Look at the delay of a vastly simpler airplane mq-25 to that of the on schedule b-21 program.
Click to expand...

MQ-25 is a lot more complicated than it looks. It has to operate in a very hostile EM environment and operating a UAV from a carrier is new territory.
 
sferrin said:
When's the last time Boeing was anywhere near on time or on budget (or even meets quality reqs.)?
Click to expand...
Sadly, the same can be said for Lockheed as well. I mean, how many years is it going to be until we have an F-35 that is fully capable of what has been promised? I don't hold them completely accountable on that, though, as the USAF shares a lot of the blame.
 
sferrin said:
Three of those were McDonnell Douglas so they don't count. As for BoP we don't know the budget or the schedule so that's pure speculation.
Click to expand...
But McDonnell Douglas took over Boeing. It's well known that McDonnell Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money. That's why the commercial side of Boeing is such a train wreck now. When MAC took over, they got rid of a lot of the management techniques used at Boeing, which were more successful than at MAC. Which is why Boeing was still around and Douglas basically went out of business. But I guess that's what the dip shits at Wall Street wanted and the end results were quite predictable.
 
lantinian said:
Right, because when one companies merges with another, the institutional knowledge and people only migrate when it comes to the commercial side of the business.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's basically what happened in this case. (With management in particular.)
 
Isn’t the AF1 replacement a decade behind schedule as well?

I obviously have zero insider knowledge but NGAD to Boeing seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
 
To be fair, only NG really seems to keep on time and budget recently. And even they are delaying the Columbia class. They might have skipped the project just because they realized no matter who jumps on that grenade, the amount of new technology is all but certain to cause it to be delayed and have cost overruns.
 
bobbymike said:
Isn’t the AF1 replacement a decade behind schedule as well?

I obviously have zero insider knowledge but NGAD to Boeing seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because they had to basically hyperinspect the aircraft after discovering a bunch of mini liquor bottles stashed in it. (Fault of Boeing Commercial)

And then they could start work on the updates: gut all the old electrical system to install the new USAF one that's EMP shielded. Install additional fuel piping for the Air Refueling receptacle. Probably 5x the generator power.

Oh, and that's after they get all the workers cleared Yankee White to be able to work on Presidential Transports, which takes a year or more.



Josh_TN said:
To be fair, only NG really seems to keep on time and budget recently. And even they are delaying the Columbia class. They might have skipped the project just because they realized no matter who jumps on that grenade, the amount of new technology is all but certain to cause it to be delayed and have cost overruns.
Click to expand...
EB HHI/Newport News Naval Shipyard is effectively a separate entity from NG, and it's a USN project. Changing specifications after the area has been built is depressingly normal for the USN...

Edited to correct company/shipyard.
 
Last edited:
I'm here for the cool concept designs honestly, but I love the discussion overall!
 
I mean, we could possibly have the discussion on China and US geopolitics elsewhere, but this is supposed to be about NGAD, the fighter :)
 
EGADS! Don't talk politics, too political, just airplanes.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
I mean, we could possibly have the discussion on China and US geopolitics elsewhere, but this is supposed to be about NGAD, the fighter :)
Click to expand...
It's a bit difficult to talk about a fighter that is supposedly being designed around a conflict in the Pacific without discussing the types of missions such a conflict would entail for the plane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zen
Scott Kenny said:
It's a bit difficult to talk about a fighter that is supposedly being designed around a conflict in the Pacific without discussing the types of missions such a conflict would entail for the plane.
Click to expand...
If the contract is in september the battle is on at this time, now the question is who , Lockheed or Boeing wil built it ?
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's a bit difficult to talk about a fighter that is supposedly being designed around a conflict in the Pacific without discussing the types of missions such a conflict would entail for the plane.
Click to expand...
Mission discussions are fine, this was just a "China is bad / US is badder / No, China is the badderest" snorefest.
 
dark sidius said:
If the contract is in september the battle is on at this time, now the question is who , Lockheed or Boeing wil built it ?
Click to expand...
Politically? I expect Boeing to have a lot of advantages for the manned NGAD plane proper. NG is not bidding, LockMart is eyeballs deep in F-35 and behind schedule.



overscan (PaulMM) said:
Mission discussions are fine, this was just a "China is bad / US is badder / No, China is the badderest" snorefest.
Click to expand...
Understood.
 
Is there a chance that the USAF (not Navy) NGAD might simply not materialize? What would be its niche that the F-35 and B-21 (both likely be relevant for half a century) can't fill?
 
Elysium said:
Is there a chance that the USAF (not Navy) NGAD might simply not materialize? What would be its niche that the F-35 and B-21 (both likely be relevant for half a century) can't fill?
Click to expand...

Only of Congress suddenly decides to defund it, which seems incredibly unlikely.
 
The NGAD is being designed to to replace the F-22 not the F-35 Elysium. Though I think that the F-35 will be ultimately be replaced with a sixth generation fighter at some point in the future, or even a 6.5 generation fighter depending on when the Air Force will want to replace the F-35.
 
Elysium said:
Is there a chance that the USAF (not Navy) NGAD might simply not materialize? What would be its niche that the F-35 and B-21 (both likely be relevant for half a century) can't fill?
Click to expand...
Air dominance, F-35 is not able to fly mach 2 or supercruise for interception at high speed and altitude , face of SU-57 or J-20 there is a need for a high performance fighter, if your not able to pursuit and intercept this type you lose the dominance of the sky
 
dark sidius said:
Air dominance, F-35 is not able to fly mach 2 or supercruise for interception at high speed and altitude , face of SU-57 or J-20 there is a need for a high performance fighter, if your not able to pursuit and intercept this type you lose the dominance of the sky
Click to expand...
The J-20 will face the Navy NGAD above the Pacfic. As for the USAF, I don't think you need dedicated interceptors when you have powerful AWACS and B-21s that can lob scores of super long range AIM-260s at the enemy. Having a supercruise capable fighter might simply be not worth the trouble for the USAF.
 
Elysium said:
The J-20 will face the Navy NGAD above the Pacfic. As for the USAF, I don't think you need dedicated interceptors when you have powerful AWACS and B-21s that can lob scores of super long range AIM-260s at the enemy. Having a supercruise capable fighter might simply be not worth the trouble for the USAF.
Click to expand...
The current planned production run for the B-21 is at 100. Even if you bump that number up considerably there's not going to be enough of them, especially in theatre, where a commander is going to use his best penetrating bomber for a counter air role. The B-21 is far to premium of an asset and going to be too busy hitting priority targets to be tasked with anti air duties.
 
Shoes31 said:
The current planned production run for the B-21 is at 100. Even if you bump that number up considerably there's not going to be enough of them, especially in theatre, where a commander is going to use his best penetrating bomber for a counter air role. The B-21 is far to premium of an asset and going to be too busy hitting priority targets to be tasked with anti air duties.
Click to expand...
That can't be right, especially since they plan to export it (Austrialians are customers I think). Anyways, I think they will make way more of those.
 
Elysium said:
The J-20 will face the Navy NGAD above the Pacfic. As for the USAF, I don't think you need dedicated interceptors when you have powerful AWACS and B-21s that can lob scores of super long range AIM-260s at the enemy. Having a supercruise capable fighter might simply be not worth the trouble for the USAF.
Click to expand...

The B-21 will not be used for A2A. That is not at all what it was built for.

An argument might be made that CCA will make NGAD perhaps less useful, but that would be a huge bet to make on AI this far out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom