CGI - Possible configuration of the Boeing F-47 NGAD

[Halcyon66]

That works, regarding the tail feathers.

Regards,

 

[Rodrigo Avella]

My thoughts as well.
F-47 has gullwings and canards.

All that work done trying to use the red TARGET silhouette as a reference is just some wasted non-optimally used time (even if enjoyable from a purely speculative point of view) IMHO.

BTW I love your work Rodrigo, I just don't think you're using a pertinent reference.
Or maybe you're right and Boeing tricked me as well.

Hello,
Thank you very much! I'm very glad you like my model.
What I did was compare the model shown in the red patch with the two renders released by the Air Force.
And for me, they're the same aircraft with the addition of canards. I'm not saying this as speculation, I'm saying it by observing both shapes.
Just as the Bird of Prey is featured in its patch, I believe the Voodoo II is as well.
I thought that before the F-47 images were released.
And after the presentation and analyzing the images, I have no doubt it's the same model.
And if it's a hoax, it's a hoax in both the patch and the renders.
Let's just say I really enjoy analyzing the little information available about all these secret programs.
For example, I never commented here when some speculated that the mysterious plane photographed over Area 51 could be a Saab 35 Draken.
But just by looking at the Area 51 plane, you can tell from 10 miles away that it's not a Draken: it has wings with curved leading and trailing edges, it has winglets that end in a very fine point, it has dual engine outlets, it has air intakes at an approximate 55-degree angle...
I don't know if the Voodoo II is the red plane on the patch. But I am convinced that the red plane on the patch is the same model of the F47 presented by the Air Force.
What I don't know is what the F47 will ultimately look like.
Greetings and thanks again for commenting on my post!!!

 

[Scott Kenny]

Hello
I'm sharing some new images of this model.
It has wings without the droopy tips (as I believe can be seen in the model presented by the Air Force), and a 9-degree dihedral.
And a new axis of rotation for the tail hinges.
I downloaded the two high-quality images of the F-47. I analyzed them in Photoshop, and (for me) I have no doubt that it is the red aircraft that appears in the Voodoo II patch, with the addition of canards.
Perhaps what they showed us in this presentation is the Voodoo II, with some modifications. So we'll have to wait to see what the F-47 looks like.
Considering recent USAF programs, there weren't any significant changes between the test and production aircraft: YF-22 > F-22, X35 > F-35. There wouldn't even have been many differences between the YF-23 and the F-23.
Although there were design changes, the production versions were basically very similar to their prototypes in terms of design.
Perhaps the same thing happened between the Voodoo II and the F-47, hence the need for extensive image manipulation to hide sensitive parts of the design.
View attachment 769090View attachment 769091View attachment 769092View attachment 769093View attachment 769094View attachment 769095View attachment 769096View attachment 769097View attachment 769098View attachment 769099View attachment 769100View attachment 769101View attachment 769102View attachment 769103View attachment 769104View attachment 769105View attachment 769106View attachment 769107View attachment 769108View attachment 769109View attachment 769110View attachment 769111View attachment 769112

Your tail feathers confuse the hell out of me. I understand that they work in a flight sim, but it sure isn't very intuitive HOW they work.

A note for possible improvement of the design: if the canard dihedral is matched to the wing dihedral, I would expect the tail feathers to also match that dihedral.

View attachment 769113

That works, regarding the tail feathers.

Regards,

That would require a double hinge in the tails in Mister Avella's design: his tails rotate perpendicular to the direction you're showing, perpendicular to the lettering. Yes, it's really weird and I have a hard time of visualizing how exactly it works.

Now, I believe that double hinge would be possible to do, using the same actuators as used in the weapons bay doors. The door hinge pin would be solidly attached to Mister Avella's 55deg axle, and the tail spar would be attached to the door hinges.

 

[FlyGuy369]

So I actually scratch built and flew the ACWFT nearly a decade ago. It needed no traditional ailerons but had elevon aft with a yaw TVC set up and what I noticed is that gradual input into the tail created a yaw effect l, further leaning into the controls made quick work of TVC through a much simpler method. I wish I still had the dang thing. I loved it. Great work Avella, keep killing the game!

 

[TomcatViP]

Yes. Yaw comes for differential variation of camber (hence the very long chord given to those strange elevons).
Then there is also the ejector effect created by the engine exhaust and the geometry of the fuselage accelerating the airstream into the aft fuselage.
That's why the double axis suggested by Rodrigo would not be necessary (it's a rolling tail boosted by aerodynamics effects)

 

[dark sidius]

Your designs are awesome Rodrigo, but for my opinion the canards with the USAF renderings are more in front of the inlet , on the noze more than on the inlets. What do you think ? I permit a child modification to show you it is not beautiful but just to show.

 

[dark sidius]

 

[EmoBirb]

I don't know if the Voodoo II is the red plane on the patch. But I am convinced that the red plane on the patch is the same model of the F47 presented by the Air Force.

In my opinion, for which nobody asked, the red aircraft silhouette is probably the technology demonstrator that allegedly flew years ago to the USAF. While the genuine prototype is most likely a good bit different, while the production model will be a refinement of the prototype like the YF-22 -> F-22A evolution.

I think this would also go well with the symbolism of the patch, as that red aircraft is held like a voodoo doll and poked with needles. And a voodoo doll is a crude representation of an actual person, lacking detail and features but meant to get the idea across, like a technology demonstrator.

But I'm probably overthinking it and they just thought it looks cool. I still hope the F-47 will be a longish, tailless delta-canard.

 

[EmoBirb]

Well, that's all. I hope you like the images.
I'm working on a model based 100% on the presented images of the F47.

I hope you didn't mind me taking the freedom to insert a part of your artwork into the official USAF rendering for visual purposes in this thread. I tried to use the closest match with regards to perspective. Obviously I didn't do the best job, I did that on Hypic on my phone. But I think your model got the essence of the rendering quite right.

 

[FlyGuy369]

WOW

 

[Rodrigo Avella]

I hope you didn't mind me taking the freedom to insert a part of your artwork into the official USAF rendering for visual purposes in this thread. I tried to use the closest match with regards to perspective. Obviously I didn't do the best job, I did that on Hypic on my phone. But I think your model got the essence of the rendering quite right.

Hello!
Thanks for the time and effort you put into it.
I think they fit quite well!!!
Likewise, my model isn't based on the F47 renders, but rather on an idea I had of what it would look like in Boeing's NGAD.
As for general characteristics, I think it's pretty close, since, as I always say, the red plane in the patch is the Voodoo II. I always assumed it would have dihedral wings, since that can be seen in the neck of the skull. Also, as I mentioned here, the name Voodoo, besides being a "homonal" to the original F101 Voodoo, in my opinion is due to the prototype's V-shaped wings. Seen from the front, they clearly look like the letter V.
In the Bird of Prey patch, they didn't need to include the actual silhouette of the plane. But they did anyway.
There's another patch floating around on eBay, and from what I've talked to someone at Northrop, I think it might show the silhouette of the Northrop Grumman technology demonstrator. I don't know if it's the NGAD or the F/A-XX. But I think it belongs to that company.
This is speculation on my part, and I'll make a model of it.
I'll also make a model of the F47 based on the renders, since the specific design of the nose and cockpit is quite different from my model.
I also think the model shown doesn't have "square" air intakes, but rather curved ones, B-21-style.
I don't know what the F47 will end up looking like. It could be, as you say, a delta with canards and no tail. Which would seem much more attractive to me than the model I made (I don't like it at all aesthetically, haha).
But for that, the wings of the F47 shown in the renders should be set back considerably.
And if it has "gull wings" like the Bird of Prey, they should be even further back.
But on the other hand, I think, if the model shown isn't the F47, and has nothing to do with it, why go to the trouble of hiding "certain sensitive parts" of the design?
When the first drawn image of the B-2 was presented, the aircraft was shown as it was, but the exhaust ports were erased, something that remains a "subject of some secrecy" to this day.
Greetings, and thanks again for the work you did!

 

[Rodrigo Avella]

Your designs are awesome Rodrigo, but for my opinion the canards with the USAF renderings are more in front of the inlet , on the noze more than on the inlets. What do you think ? I permit a child modification to show you it is not beautiful but just to show.

Hello!
I'm glad you like my model!
Yes. In the F-47 images, the canards are much further forward, as you say.
I made this model before the F-47 was introduced, based on what I thought might be the Boeing NGAD (based on the red aircraft in the Voodoo II patch).
I'll make a model of what I think is the F-47 shown in the renders.
Which will basically be very similar to the model I posted here yesterday, adjusting the shape of the nose and cockpit. Also with the canards further forward.
And I think the exhaust will be different. Bird of Prey-style, but with a central splitter.
Best regards and thanks again!

 

[EmoBirb]

Do we actually know for sure if NGAD/F-47 will be dual or single engine?

Just on a random note here

 

[dark sidius]

Hello!
I'm glad you like my model!

Good work I think we are near of the final configuration of the F-47 with your drawing.

 

[dark sidius]

Do we actually know for sure if NGAD/F-47 will be dual or single engine?

Just on a random note here

Yes it is , F-135 is too big to be integrated in a twin engines jet fighter.

 

[dark sidius]

Hello!
Thanks for the time and effort you put into it.
I think they fit quite well!!!
Likewise, my model isn't based on the F47 renders, but rather on an idea I had of what it would look like in Boeing's NGAD.

For the B-21 it was the case too the first rendering was realy near of the final real configuration of the B-21.

 

[EmoBirb]

Yes it is , F-135 is too big to be integrated in a twin engines jet fighter.

F135??? Isn't NGAD supposed to use the completely new NGAP adaptive cycle engine?

 

[dark sidius]

F135??? Isn't NGAD supposed to use the completely new NGAP adaptive cycle engine?

Not in the first block of the F47 more something like the F-110 or F-119 enhanced models for the start and after we will see the NGAP on it.

 

[Nik]

Wow...

Thankfully, your later iterations managed to shed that initial unfortunate resemblance to a 'Duck Billed Platypus'...

 

[Seragina]

Do we actually know for sure if NGAD/F-47 will be dual or single engine?

Just on a random note here

If it where single then it needs a big one like the F135. This is due to the needed weapons load, hence, weight or thrust to weight ratio if you will. But the adaptive cycle engine version was canceled. This makes no sense unless it's two "smaller" F110/F119 size ones.

 

[Seragina]

My two cents for the rendered model is the same as in this post:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1701679706624389581

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1701679706624389581

but with added canards and dihedral wings. Imho this is also the model the chinese J-50 was based on with changes.



There was always two branches or lines of design to choose from.
1. Triangle/diamond with the shape being along the Mach angle line. This is also where hypersonic designs are. The J-36 is obviously in this line.
2. The leaner fighter liner which obviously is what western+Japan designs are settled on including the J-50.
Obiously the chinese have it all covered.

My two cents for the F-47 lies within the 2nd line with maybe some features of the 1st line (chine, canard, etc).

Anyhow, looking at the planform the size and placement of the weapons bay pretty much sets the path for all the angles. This is followed by the intake (width) size.
I'm leaning toward having two combinable bays like on the F23 and having space to carry future long range missile like those SM-3/PL21 or similar. At least 2 preferable 3 or even 4 missiles like the requirement for the old F-108 Rapier.

 

[Desertfox]

Did you catch the CAD at 12 seconds? Its a canard delta. I think the one at 8 seconds is the flight demonstrator and the one at 12 is F-47.

 

[UpForce]

My two cents for the rendered model is the same as in this post

An old video, probably nothing but these (simplistic) images flash by on some screens. Vaguely fit the "announcement" picture configuration (or what can be deduced from it). If anything, more demonstrator-like than a mature fighter.

 

[Reddington777]

Did you catch the CAD at 12 seconds? Its a canard delta. I think the one at 8 seconds is the flight demonstrator and the one at 12 is F-47.

If thats the case then my shitty little render wasnt far off lol. It looks like the still I used came from this video, but if the engines take up that much room length wise and the airframe is that thin, how is it supposed to have IWB enough to carry 6 AAMs? Unless the airframe is actually a YF-23 sized one rather than an F-22 size one?

 

[Seragina]

Since, there's confusion here's my take on the video and eamples shown:


My guess is the AF decided to use it because the Chinese showed theirs that was clearly based on it. It would have been a different one otherwise.

If thats the case then my shitty little render wasnt far off lol. It looks like the still I used came from this video, but if the engines take up that much room length wise and the airframe is that thin, how is it supposed to have IWB enough to carry 6 AAMs? Unless the airframe is actually a YF-23 sized one rather than an F-22 size one?

Don't mind those simple graphics. They are rought at best than accurate.
Well, the forward bay on the planned production F-23 was below the pilot taking almost half the cockpit.

And the bay of the YF22 was 1 ft 6 in further forward so it could be "shorter". But that's relative as for both the tails added more to the length than just the body. So fitting tandem bays is certainly possible. It's fitting the wings that's problematic.

 

[Reddington777]

Thats certainly good to know. Personally, I hope they had the foresight to enlargen the weapon bays for whatever AAMs are developed for the future even beyond the AIM-260.

 

[Low IQ Techie]

@Rodrigo Avella
What are the dimensions of this famous model you made?
Compared to F-22, I had to equalize them at cockpit size.

 

[1635yankee]

Do we actually know for sure if NGAD/F-47 will be dual or single engine?

Just on a random note here

Considering how many F-18s have been lost over land after a single engine failure, one wonders how much of the twin-engine safety concept is not entirely valid. (I'm ignoring the early F-18 where one engine broke and sent fragments into the other engine, breaking that one, too)

 

[Low IQ Techie]

Do we actually know for sure if NGAD/F-47 will be dual or single engine?
Just on a random note here

Even gen has at least 2 jets for AF & 1 for Navy.
So 6gen for Navy is F/A-XX & for AF the NGAD could be possibly 1 & 2 engine both, like JSF & ATF.

Yes it is , F-135 is too big to be integrated in a twin engines jet fighter.

Let's try to find out.
Some low IQ math
F119 inlet dia. is 100cm & F135 has 109cm.
F119 length is 516cm & F135 length is 559cm.
Volume considering inlet dia., F119 volume is 4,050,600 cc & F135 is 5,213,561 cc, around 29% more.
If 6gen design foucses on some more internal weapons & fuel then even the F135 by volume could be smaller than required.
Considering F-22 as base, if bigger IWB for little longer weapons are made, resulting in say 20% more length.
If 6+2 AAMs increased to 8+4 AAMs, that's 33% wider.
And 10% height increase due to engine dia.
So overall volume increase = 1.2*1.33*1.1=1.75 or 75% more volume.
If we imagine an 75% inflated F-22 then its engine also inflated by 75%, that's 1.75/1.29 = 1.35 or 35% more volume than F135 engine.
This is just preliminary basic idea, otherwise different engines have different volumes & density.

Considering how many F-18s have been lost over land after a single engine failure, one wonders how much of the twin-engine safety concept is not entirely valid. (I'm ignoring the early F-18 where one engine broke and sent fragments into the other engine, breaking that one, too)

If the engines are little spaced out then one getting damaged by other can be avoided.
But if the design has close engines like in F-22 then Kevlar can be put b/w them to trap shrapnels.
Rafale's M-88 engines have kevlar around its mid section to isolate heat & would also have protection, intended or not.

 

[Seragina]

Thats certainly good to know. Personally, I hope they had the foresight to enlargen the weapon bays for whatever AAMs are developed for the future even beyond the AIM-260.

You bet. According to news Long-Range Engagement Weapon (LREW) was already undeway in 2017 and the European/Japanese
Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) presented their changed model in 2024 in Japan. It's supposed to have double the payload of the F35. I have no doubt the AF has the same idea. We just don't know how far the fighter minded leaders are willing to go. They have been conservative before.

Some low IQ math
F119 inlet dia. is 100cm & F135 has 109cm.
F119 length is 516cm & F135 length is 559cm.

Actually, they said it's 46 in (1.1684 m) in diameter:
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-propulsion-czar-ngad-engines-aetp/The expectations seems for the new ones for the F47 to be a bit smaller (as in shorter). Intake size might increase a bit, though.

If the engines are little spaced out then one getting damaged by other can be avoided.
But if the design has close engines like in F-22 then Kevlar can be put b/w them to trap shrapnels.
Rafale's M-88 engines have kevlar around its mid section to isolate heat & would also have protection, intended or not.

Very likely. Stealth needs to be compact and reduce surface area which also is the same as wet area, hence, less drag.

My take on the rendered design seems to have the cross section area reduced to ~94/95%.

 

[Jackonicko]

https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/new...ing-like-the-images-shown-by-president-trump/

I'm not a betting man, normally, but I think that canards and dihedral are EXTREMELY unlikely.

I'd expect something that looks like a bigger F-22, perhaps with some lineage from the Ghost Bat.

NGAP was once expected to be a retrofit option for F-35, so think big enough to justify being powered by two of those, with lots of fuel and capacious internal bays?

All those who sought to analyse the F-47 from the artist’s renderings released in the wake of President Trump’s Oval Office source selection announcement should perhaps take a step back.

There is growing evidence that the released images were deliberately distorted by Boeing, and then further altered by the Air Force. The Air Force quite deliberately didn’t “give anything away in those pictures.”

Air and Space Forces Magazine quoted a spokesman as saying: “You’ll have to be patient” to see what it really looks like,” adding “Is there a resemblance? Maybe.” The magazine quoted a ‘former senior Pentagon official’ as asking “Why would you assume that’s the actual design?”

Intriguingly, in the latest edition of the Air Power Podcast, Former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall described the F-47 as having an “aircraft configuration itself [that] is going to be [a] pretty direct descendant of F-22.”

 

[EmoBirb]

I'd expect something that looks like a bigger F-22

Former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall described the F-47 as having an “aircraft configuration itself [that] is going to be [a] pretty direct descendant of F-22.

I assume that may have been Lockheeds approach, probably which was also favored by Kendall. The tailless deltafied F-22 we all have come to associate with NGAD over the years, the shape Lockheed Martin teased in all sorts of artwork and videos. Clearly evolutionary.

Now Boeing however, as far as the rumors go, which are also somewhere in the NGAD thread, presented a more revolutionary rather than evolutionary design. And while Lockheeds designs from the F-22 to the F-35 were very iterative (I'd also argue the F-117 already introduced some of the design characteristics, but maybe I'm reaching here), when we look at Boeing/MDDs X-36, Bird of Prey and X-32...well we see that Boeing is very daring, very sci-fi, very revolutionary in how they approached low observable aviation so far.

So I can definitely see dihedral, canards, even the gullwings based on that. I don't think it will be a J-36 style tailless delta arrowhead type design, I think that was probably Lockheeds losing bid.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I fully expect that Boeing's design looks like a cross between the X-36 and Bird of Prey, scaled up to twin engines.

And that LockMart's design looked like the FB-22/X-44.

 

[quellish]

Stealth needs to be compact and reduce surface area which also is the same as wet area, hence, less drag.

Why do you say that?

 

[Rodrigo Avella]

@Rodrigo Avella
What are the dimensions of this famous model you made?
Compared to F-22, I had to equalize them at cockpit size.

View attachment 769310
View attachment 769311

Hello,
This model is 18 meters long and has a 17.7 meter wingspan.
Regards!

 

[Brett Davidson]

I fully expect that Boeing's design looks like a cross between the X-36 and Bird of Prey, scaled up to twin engines.

Yes, same here, though I expect the wing to be more delta than lambda to carry fuel for a Pacific range.

 

[Low IQ Techie]

Hello,
This model is 18 meters long and has a 17.7 meter wingspan.
Regards!

Does Blender S/w show volume of object?
Also, which AAM are you depicting?

 

[Hydroman]

I fully expect that Boeing's design looks like a cross between the X-36 and Bird of Prey, scaled up to twin engines.

And that LockMart's design looked like the FB-22/X-44.

Friendly bet Scott Kenny regarding the F-47:
Combination of NATF-23 and X-36. Maybe not a full diamond wing but blended into the forward, lifting body fuselage, close-coupled canards, no vertical tails, at least three elevons and possibly thrust vectoring, can't wait to see more actual images at some point.

 

[Hydroman]

Friendly bet Scott Kenny regarding the F-47:
Combination of NATF-23 and X-36. Maybe not a full diamond wing but blended into the forward, lifting body fuselage, close-coupled canards, no vertical tails, at least three elevons and possibly thrust vectoring, can't wait to see more actual images at some point.

Oh and also, could be semi-lambda wing, no drooping wing tips, and pumped-up F110s to start, depends on adaptive engine availability and/or how fast they want to get the aircraft into service.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Friendly bet Scott Kenny regarding the F-47:
Combination of NATF-23 and X-36. Maybe not a full diamond wing but blended into the forward, lifting body fuselage, close-coupled canards, no vertical tails, at least three elevons and possibly thrust vectoring, can't wait to see more actual images at some point.

Deal. Loser buys the first round of beverages!