General Atomics YFQ-42 CCA

overscan (PaulMM)

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
27 December 2005
Messages
18,727
Reaction score
33,160

Attachments

  • ga-asi-welcomes-usaf-designation-for-new-cca-yfq42a.jpg
    ga-asi-welcomes-usaf-designation-for-new-cca-yfq42a.jpg
    83.6 KB · Views: 761
  • GXw0SWlXYAA6w7g.jpg
    GXw0SWlXYAA6w7g.jpg
    114 KB · Views: 21
  • GcMUTPkXgAAZJHl.jpg
    GcMUTPkXgAAZJHl.jpg
    110.2 KB · Views: 13
  • GUiYaLSWIAARtpC.jpg
    GUiYaLSWIAARtpC.jpg
    79.7 KB · Views: 18
Last edited by a moderator:
This looks so much more promising than Andurils design imo. And I don't really see why Anduril was even picked to participate in this competition. General Atomics on the other hand is a well established name in the UAV market and the YFQ-42 proves that they know their customer.

Edit: As in, why was Anduril picked over much more credible aerospace manufacturers.
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
This looks so much more promising than Andurils design imo. And I don't really see why Anduril was even picked to participate in this competition. General Atomics on the other hand is a well established name in the UAV market and the YFQ-42 proves that they know their customer.

Edit: As in, why was Anduril picked over much more credible aerospace manufacturers.
Click to expand...
The selling point of the Anduril design (according to them) is that all the components are made using commercial hardware and materials, so if there's a need to scale to any arbitrary rate, production contracts could be awarded to any professional machine shop in the country. I'm not sure how accurate their claims are, but if there's a conflict in the late 2020's or early 2030's that makes it far more deployable at scale than any design that can only be produced by defence prime contractors.
 
Explorer121 said:
but if there's a conflict in the late 2020's or early 2030's that makes it far more deployable at scale than any design that can only be produced by defence prime contractors.
Click to expand...

When you have to resort to emergency fighter/drones cobbled together in shops around the country, you might as well just surrender at such a stage.
 
EmoBirb said:
When you have to resort to emergency fighter/drones cobbled together in shops around the country, you might as well just surrender at such a stage.
Click to expand...
I would agree and favor GA's gambit system, but wargaming has shown that having large amounts of attritable CCAs is more effective than more exquisite unmanned fighters. My understanding is that the adoption of both YFQ-44a and YFQ-42a will let the air force test both and their various combinations before deciding on a final force design or redesigning requirements for increment 2 CCAs
 
EmoBirb said:
This looks so much more promising than Andurils design imo. And I don't really see why Anduril was even picked to participate in this competition. General Atomics on the other hand is a well established name in the UAV market and the YFQ-42 proves that they know their customer.

Edit: As in, why was Anduril picked over much more credible aerospace manufacturers.
Click to expand...

I think a hard requirement for CCA is a standard landing cycle, and the Blue Force aircraft I believe was always designed with that in mind. Kratos seems to be in a rush to get gear on XQ-58 after the fact. There also might be software, cost, or other requirements that drove the decision. The gripe against the Fury as far as I can tell is that it does not appear to have internal weapons bays, but that is not known absolutely and it may never have been a requirement. It is not clear the YFQ-42 has full length bays either, though I would guess based on the placement of the doors that we are seeing that the bay can extend a full 12’ down the fuselage before impinging on the landing gear box. The missiles would take up a lot of frontal fuselage if that’s the case.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think a hard requirement for CCA is a standard landing cycle, and the Blue Force aircraft I believe was always designed with that in mind. Kratos seems to be in a rush to get gear on XQ-58 after the fact. There also might be software, cost, or other requirements that drove the decision. The gripe against the Fury as far as I can tell is that it does not appear to have internal weapons bays, but that is not known absolutely and it may never have been a requirement. It is not clear the YFQ-42 has full length bays either, though I would guess based on the placement of the doors that we are seeing that the bay can extend a full 12’ down the fuselage before impinging on the landing gear box. The missiles would take up a lot of frontal fuselage if that’s the case.
Click to expand...

I can see how that requirement would narrow it down a bit, but you're telling me large aerospace contractors with a much more credible track record couldn't have delivered on that?

Attritable is one thing, but the YFQ-44, as far as we know, most likely can't carry anything inside and not much externally either. So it's very much true to it's original design - a drone for target practice.

Because without significant weapons load or signature reduction the survival chances are slim in any sort of high end contested air space. And they're no going to be so cheap to where that doesn't matter.

General Atomics on the other hand really showed off a very sound and overall reasonable drone where everything immediately makes sense even at first glance. To be the participation of Anduril is just very off and I wouldn't be surprised if it's some sort of tech bro bias or straight up corruption.
 
Guessing, Anduril is a rising tech bro brand and a favorable "imaginary opposition". Kinda like F-16/17 competition, you gotta have some diversity in the comp else everyone's gonna see through it.
 
EmoBirb said:
I can see how that requirement would narrow it down a bit, but you're telling me large aerospace contractors with a much more credible track record couldn't have delivered on that?

Attritable is one thing, but the YFQ-44, as far as we know, most likely can't carry anything inside and not much externally either. So it's very much true to it's original design - a drone for target practice.

Because without significant weapons load or signature reduction the survival chances are slim in any sort of high end contested air space. And they're no going to be so cheap to where that doesn't matter.

General Atomics on the other hand really showed off a very sound and overall reasonable drone where everything immediately makes sense even at first glance. To be the participation of Anduril is just very off and I wouldn't be surprised if it's some sort of tech bro bias or straight up corruption.
Click to expand...

All I know is Anduril was down selected. That means they met all threshold requirements and USAF found something about their offer they liked (or alternatively only Anduril and GA met threshold requirements). I am guessing cost and production rate was included in the requirement list, and Anduril’s stated objective is to use common parts, tools, and processes to lower both.

ETA: I think the threshold weapon load for Incr1 is likely two AIM-120s, full stop. I suspect Fury can easily carry that externally somewhere, if not on the wings, then semi recessed on the fuselage. Not ideal from an RCS standpoint, but presumably it meets whatever threshold for RCS the USAF had, assuming there even was an RCS related requirement for Incr1.

I think it’s worth pointing out that Fury with a pair of external AAMs would almost certainly still have a smaller RCS than a 4.5 gen aircraft in the X band.
 
Sandboxx has a video out talking about the US's new YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A AI controlled drone prototypes:


Well, it’s no longer science fiction — the U.S. Air Force has now officially unveiled both of the world’s first-ever artificial intelligence-piloted fighter jets: The Anduril YFQ-44A and the General Atomics YFQ-42A.
Click to expand...
Let's run them down.
Click to expand...

His Incognito spiel is from 0:40 to 2:50 in the video if one wants to avoid it. The part of the video dealing with the YFQ-42A begins at 5:20.
 
EmoBirb said:
I can see how that requirement would narrow it down a bit, but you're telling me large aerospace contractors with a much more credible track record couldn't have delivered on that?

Attritable is one thing, but the YFQ-44, as far as we know, most likely can't carry anything inside and not much externally either. So it's very much true to it's original design - a drone for target practice.

Because without significant weapons load or signature reduction the survival chances are slim in any sort of high end contested air space. And they're no going to be so cheap to where that doesn't matter.

General Atomics on the other hand really showed off a very sound and overall reasonable drone where everything immediately makes sense even at first glance. To be the participation of Anduril is just very off and I wouldn't be surprised if it's some sort of tech bro bias or straight up corruption.
Click to expand...
Dont forget this is increment 1, which is more about the brain of the aircraft than the platform itself. CCA call for 1000+ aircraft while increment 1 will stop at 100+ units. There will be more increments afterward for other big boys to jump back in.

Goal is most likely to start getting pilots, mechanics, war planners getting used to and developing tactics fighting alongside these things.

With that in mind, a 2nd objective from air force side is also to nurture new companies and create more competition. The big boys like northrop, lockheed, have enough capitals to continue these efforts internally. Increment 1 being small in scale compared to the entire CCA effort, is a good opportunity to pump some capital into smaller but promising companies.
 
EmoBirb said:
When you have to resort to emergency fighter/drones cobbled together in shops around the country, you might as well just surrender at such a stage.
Click to expand...
It’s no different than French Resistance fighters using the Sten sub-machine gun to combat SS units who, on paper, were superior in every measurable way, but still often ended up very dead at the end of the day.

In a full-scale, declared conflict, there is a point where mass and numbers are just unbeatable. The Russians made that point in Stalingrad and elsewhere. Throw enough bodies as enough metal at a problem and at some point, the other guy just can’t keep up. Anduril is simply offering that approach as a possible solution in the event of a near-peer conflict.

We saw the American industrial base sort of reinforce the idea in the early days of Covid when manufacturers who had literally nothing to do with medical equipment were suddenly able to ramp up and meet demand for ventilators. Hell, some of the best M-1 Carbines manufactured during WWII were made by IBM and Rock-Ola, who made typewriters and jukeboxes. International Harvester, a tractor and farm implement manufacturer, made superb M-1 Garand rifles.

Honestly, with the precision available to small outfits today from digital blueprints and CNC, as long as the quality assurance can be maintained, there is really no good reason to NOT leverage every last little bit of industrial manufacturing capacity available to meet the demand. Doesn’t matter if a stabilizer is made by Lockheed Martin or Bass Pro Shop. If it meets spec and is available, use it!
 
EmoBirb said:
This looks so much more promising than Andurils design imo. And I don't really see why Anduril was even picked to participate in this competition. General Atomics on the other hand is a well established name in the UAV market and the YFQ-42 proves that they know their customer.

Edit: As in, why was Anduril picked over much more credible aerospace manufacturers.
Click to expand...
To me, Anduril feels like a political tool for Peter Thiel to get into these defense contracts behind the scenes.
 
pagliacci said:
To me, Anduril feels like a political tool for Peter Thiel to get into these defense contracts behind the scenes.
Click to expand...

As distasteful as the owners are - they seem to be extremely ideological tech bros - they have amassed a vast amount of capital and made a huge number of purchases of smaller automation companies such that on paper, they seem like quite a medium sized company with a lot of capacity. How well they do in reality remains to be seen, but certainly a number of their products have gathered interest.
 
Josh_TN said:
As distasteful as the owners are - they seem to be extremely ideological tech bros - they have amassed a vast amount of capital and made a huge number of purchases of smaller automation companies such that on paper, they seem like quite a medium sized company with a lot of capacity. How well they do in reality remains to be seen, but certainly a number of their products have gathered interest.
Click to expand...
Although the U.S. military-industrial complex does need catfish to inject some fresh blood, I have no confidence in Anduril's technology. Just look at the YFQ - 44, it's simply a scam project...
 
pagliacci said:
Although the U.S. military-industrial complex does need catfish to inject some fresh blood, I have no confidence in Anduril's technology. Just look at the YFQ - 44, it's simply a scam project...
Click to expand...

Pretty much my sentiment. They slightly altered the target drone, slapped a new name on it and are now enjoying unlimited DoD money.
 
sqd5driver said:
Anduril is simply offering that approach as a possible solution in the event of a near-peer conflict.
Click to expand...

That approach doesn't work when

a) you're the United States, famous for overpriced hardware.

And

b) your peer is the manufacturing powerhouse of the world that completely curbstomps your industrial output across the board and could churn out comparable systems at a much larger scale more quickly.
 
donnage99 said:
Dont forget this is increment 1, which is more about the brain of the aircraft than the platform itself. CCA call for 1000+ aircraft while increment 1 will stop at 100+ units. There will be more increments afterward for other big boys to jump back in.
Click to expand...

I think that's the fairest point so far and you're right, increment 1 is a proof of concept. I'm just still very sceptical of Anduril as a business and their offering as a piece of high end military hardware.

But we'll wait and see, maybe it's the best UAV ever made, who knows.
 
yeetmahboi said:
Guessing, Anduril is a rising tech bro brand and a favorable "imaginary opposition". Kinda like F-16/17 competition, you gotta have some diversity in the comp else everyone's gonna see through it.
Click to expand...

It’s not really a competition between the two vendors.
 
pagliacci said:
In terms of its appearance and details, I can't see any trace of "low observability"...
Click to expand...
because just maybe maybe the stealth requirement isn't part of increment 1? And general dynamics LOOK stealthy 'cause it is basically a modified version of their OBSS?
 
EmoBirb said:
That approach doesn't work when

a) you're the United States, famous for overpriced hardware.

And

b) your peer is the manufacturing powerhouse of the world that completely curbstomps your industrial output across the board and could churn out comparable systems at a much larger scale more quickly.
Click to expand...
So what exactly would you suggest be done? Do we just step aside and yield to China at the first sign of hostilities because they keep Wal-Mart flush with cheap consumer goods or do we go into a wartime footing and adjust our own production output to meet them on level ground?

They KNOW we have the ability to literally erase their entire industrial and economic base off the face of the Earth AND bring on a famine the likes of which has never been equaled on this planet, and we can do that with one, maybe two, airplanes and conventional weapons in one fell swoop, all in a matter of a few hours. Their only other option at that point is nuclear exchange and they know they’d lose that too… quickly. Of course we wouldn’t fare very well either.
 
yeetmahboi said:
Where's your scattering simulation evidence for this assertion? Or are we back to eyeballing now?
Click to expand...
I had never been able to visually assess the stealth performance of a design before, which was indeed an unprofessional approach. However, I have never seen a vertical tail like that of the YFQ - 44 in the design of low - observable aircraft either...
 
donnage99 said:
because just maybe maybe the stealth requirement isn't part of increment 1? And general dynamics LOOK stealthy 'cause it is basically a modified version of their OBSS?
Click to expand...

GA has designed this thing for better signature and higher internal volume for weapons and sensors. Clearly this is where they think the AF could head as it gets serious about these operationally.

Having these CCA's mixed in with next generation air launched effects (future MALD like systems) who are pretending to be these CCA's would pose an interesting operational challenge. Some CCA's are real and can shoot back while others can't and are decoys..Something like a loyal wingman for your loyal wingman. Wasn't there talk about future increments of CCA's looking at air launched capability?
 
The Mitchell Institute had hypothesized air launched CCAs in one of their wargames, and more recently there was an article indicating some USAF interest. More tangibly, there was a UTAP-22 with what looked like an IR sensor and missile detection gear hanging under the wing of an F-15.

NGAD was always going to be a family of systems, and I suspect the CCA represents the top end of spectrum with at least a couple levels of lower complex /cost UAVs. In my mind I file these under attritable (I know the USAF hates the term not but I think it accurate), optionally recovered (by parachute), and fully expendable (something MALD like but under the full active control of other NGAD platforms). I could easily see a variety of smaller air or rocket launched platforms providing passive target detection (IR, ESM) or even dumb weapon carrier (long shot?).
 
sqd5driver said:
They KNOW we have the ability to literally erase their entire industrial and economic base off the face of the Earth AND bring on a famine the likes of which has never been equaled on this planet, and we can do that with one, maybe two, airplanes and conventional weapons in one fell swoop, all in a matter of a few hours.
Click to expand...

And then you woke up?
 
pagliacci said:
I had never been able to visually assess the stealth performance of a design before, which was indeed an unprofessional approach. However, I have never seen a vertical tail like that of the YFQ - 44 in the design of low - observable aircraft either...
Click to expand...

IIRC General Dynamics had such a design for ATF, but as it wasn't chosen, it speaks volumes.
 
Josh_TN said:
In my mind I file these under attritable (I know the USAF hates the term not but I think it accurate), optionally recovered (by parachute), and fully expendable (something MALD like but under the full active control of other NGAD platforms). I could easily see a variety of smaller air or rocket launched platforms providing passive target detection (IR, ESM) or even dumb weapon carrier (long shot?).
Click to expand...

I can see such systems greatly increasing the battlefield value and lethality of something like B-52 as well. Launched by the BUFF, fed with info and guided by higher end CCAs and F-47. After all the AF is very interested in creating kill webs and distribution of assets.
 
Sferrin said:
Wut?

View attachment 770978
View attachment 770977
Click to expand...

Well, these are relatively "small" munitions, which have several restrictions with regards to dimensions and flight envelope imposed upon them.

As for actual combat aircraft or UCAVs, there isn't a single aircraft or drone in service that's LO and has a single vertical stabilizer. The closest thing is arguably the Rafale and Eurofighter?
 
EmoBirb said:
Well, these are relatively "small" munitions, which have several restrictions with regards to dimensions and flight envelope imposed upon them.

As for actual combat aircraft or UCAVs, there isn't a single aircraft or drone in service that's LO and has a single vertical stabilizer. The closest thing is arguably the Rafale and Eurofighter?
Click to expand...
AGM-129 is the same length as, and almost as heavy as the YFQ-44.

atf-designs-that-never-submitted-part-2-general-dynamics-v0-ct5khzrqf50a1.jpg

And while you can say, "yea, but it lost", so did this:

a-model-of-the-boeing-atf-proposal-they-lost-and-the-winner-v0-5ixt6qbbnyge1.jpg
 
EmoBirb said:
I can see such systems greatly increasing the battlefield value and lethality of something like B-52 as well. Launched by the BUFF, fed with info and guided by higher end CCAs and F-47. After all the AF is very interested in creating kill webs and distribution of assets.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that would be my target platform - tactical fighters do not make sense; they are already dependent on in theater runways. Alternatively cargo aircraft might use a ‘rapid dragon” like launch method; that would be more ideal since it allows the B-52 force to continue to be cruise missile platforms.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom