US Navy’s UCLASS / CBARS / MQ-XX / MQ-25 Stingray Program

Has the USN just let slip that the EMD MQ-25 now won't have first flight until 2026? The 2025 first flight was ambitious based on where the program was so perhaps this is confirmation they will be late again.

“[It’s] $5.3 billion across all systems. And that’s $2.2 billion above FY 2025. That includes procuring three MQ-25s, which we’ll have our first flight in 2026 — and then additional unmanned air [assets], new efforts in unmanned undersea and in unmanned surface, to include procuring our medium unmanned surface vessel. So, we have a lot of efforts across all domains,” the senior Navy official told DefenseScoop.
Click to expand...
https://defensescoop.com/2025/06/26/dod-fy26-budget-request-autonomy-unmanned-systems/
 
Manuducati said:
So basically, around 2000 we had a joint program aiming at giving both the Air Force and the Navy a long range stealth attack platform (J-UCAS) with X-45A (UCAV) and X-47A (UCAV-N) demonstrators...
But the Air Force withdrew around 2006 to concentrate on the B-21 (NGB), and the Navy pursued with the X-47B (UCAS-D) which was a great success.
Then the Navy changes its mind in 2016 from an attack/ISR platform (UCLASS) towards a tanker/ISR oriented one, sacrificing stealth, speed and IWBs, for a cheaper and less offensive vehicle that will become the MQ-25 (CBARS).
A couple years ago, the Navy figured it could hang something under the wings to make it less stealthy to make it offensive again.
And now the Air Force says: "What a wonderful idea, we should make our own version of this"!

So the US just basically lost 20 years and some capabilities and come full circle? Have I missed something?
Click to expand...

The Boeing owned MQ-25 T-1 aircraft is the “Phantom Banshee” from 2014 - Boeing’s UCLASS demonstrator. If the UCLASS demonstrator makes an excellent MQ-25 Stingray, that suggests something about the requirements of the two programs. Recall that UCLASS began in 2010.

Now go back to J-UCAS and look the eventual X-45C “Phantom Ray” and X-47B “Iron Raven” X-planes and their similarities. Both first flew in the spring 2011.

When do you think decisions were made that changed the course of the aircraft design priorities?

aero-engineer
 
Forgive me but I couldn’t help but to revisit this thread after the OBBB language on long range strike aircraft & more carefully reading the 2018(!) CSBA report on the air wing of the future, as has been recommended in this forum. Might a versatile, capable long range UAV be in the works? could that explain the F/A-XX ambiguity as well as the reticence to position MQ-25 as more than a tanker when it clearly could do more? Apologies if this not the right place for speculative questions…
 
Training_Dummy said:
Forgive me but I couldn’t help but to revisit this thread after the OBBB language on long range strike aircraft & more carefully reading the 2018(!) CSBA report on the air wing of the future, as has been recommended in this forum. Might a versatile, capable long range UAV be in the works? could that explain the F/A-XX ambiguity as well as the reticence to position MQ-25 as more than a tanker when it clearly could do more? Apologies if this not the right place for speculative questions…
Click to expand...
It's possible, but I suspect that the long range strike aircraft is not the MQ-25. Even if the Q25 does have bomb bays.
 
Ozair said:
No you did not. No MQ-25 has lown off a carrier. The production representative aircraft hasn't even had its first flight yet.

The Boeing T-1 did some carrier suitability tests in 2021 but did not fly of the Bush.
Click to expand...
Carrier ops for MQ-25 beginning this year. I got to see, tour and crawl around the two MQ-25's which had just completed the final assembly process last year, kind of a treat.
 
Hydroman said:
Carrier ops for MQ-25 beginning this year. I got to see, tour and crawl around the two MQ-25's which had just completed the final assembly process last year, kind of a treat.
Click to expand...
Supposed to yes but first flight to carrier tests this year is now very compressed as the Bush is slated to deploy.
 
donnage99 said:
obviously. I'm askin from the start, did they have access to previous program
Click to expand...
knee jerk response from me. I originally asked if boeing has access to x-47b naval program data was due to the yet to be delivered 1st carrier landing from boeing under UCLASS. I'm embarrassed
 
donnage99 said:
knee jerk response from me. I originally asked if boeing has access to x-47b naval program data was due to the yet to be delivered 1st carrier landing from boeing under UCLASS. I'm embarrassed
Click to expand...
In answer to your original question I expect so but I am uncertain how much value there would be. The MQ-25 will use JPALS and so that probably supercedes what the X-47B was using.

Details are here, https://simpleflying.com/boeing-mq-25-uncrewed-carrier-based-refueler-us-navy-jpals-test/

JPALS is key to MQ-25 Stingray drones landing on the US Navy’s aircraft carriers after refueling combat aircraft. JPALS, according to John Scudi, Boeing MQ-25 Business Development and Acting Advanced MQ-25 Program Manager, is an improvement on the same family of software programs called Precision Landing Mode or PLM, such as MAGIC CARPET for the Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet plus the Boeing EA-18G Growler.

Additionally, any aircraft carrier with the Lockheed Martin MD-5E Ground Control Station as part of the Unmanned Air Warfare Center aboard carriers can use JPALS – and the MQ-25. The first such station was recently installed on the USS George H.W. Bush.
Click to expand...
 
Taylor Frank, Executive Director, Strategy & Development, Air Dominance, Boeing‬ Defense, Space & Security:

"Just anecdotally, last week I was with our MQ-25 team — a Navy program. It's an airplane that initially is meant to be a tanker for the Navy, so it flies 500-plus miles from the boat and refuels tactical aircraft. But when it goes out downrange from the boat, it has an extra pylon on the airplane that carries 3,000 to 4,000 lbs.

What we are digging into is what would the tactical or operational benefit be of hanging a Block 2 IRST off that pylon. And as it's out there for 14 hours downrange from the boat, what would it look like to just pipe back consistent, persistent data off of that IRST to contribute to the air picture of the air wing?

So just anecdotally, we're certainly doing that — we're trying to lean into it in a variety of places. I would offer a word of caution, though, which is that I think most of us in the government certainly want to put more sensors on more airplanes, but you've got to avoid all of industry going wild, going in every which direction."

- Air-to-Air Sensors and Weapons | 2026 Warfare Symposium, Air & Space Forces Association, Mar 16, 2026
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI9gVvpOlo8
 
RavenOne said:
and its featured as the ideal AAR platform for the Bell MV-75 Cheyenne II in the CGi depcition in the official Bell video

cheers
Click to expand...
It might be an option, but it's reliance on a runway would be a detractor for the U.S. Army. Now if Boeing can make it take off from a 500m farmers field and clear a 50 foot obstacle, that would be cool.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom