Boeing F-47 NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) NEWS ONLY

Neither Increment 1 nor 2 CCAs would have the attributes to penetrate a peer IADS. Other uncrewed assets, some expendable and some exquisite, will.

CCAs that can fill ISR/ESM, BARCAP, patrol, escort and red air roles can still be hugely valuable
 
quellish said:
The Boeing AII-X demonstrator went from clean sheet of paper to first flight in about 18 months using production representative methods. This was something Boeing felt was the important to demonstrate

I would not be surprised to see a complete aircraft in 2 years.
Click to expand...
Curious where the 18 months timeline came from. Even from a long-lead material and manufacturing standpoint this isn’t feasible unless you had the material readily available with no/small backlog. And generally, they don’t. Even complex Titanium and Iconel duct assemblies and components (like in bleed air routing) have lead times in excess of 18-24 months.
 
barry bozo said:
Curious where the 18 months timeline came from. Even from a long-lead material and manufacturing standpoint this isn’t feasible unless you had the material readily available with no/small backlog. And generally, they don’t. Even complex Titanium and Iconel duct assemblies and components (like in bleed air routing) have lead times in excess of 18-24 months.
Click to expand...
Will Roper is one source
 
barry bozo said:
Curious where the 18 months timeline came from. Even from a long-lead material and manufacturing standpoint this isn’t feasible unless you had the material readily available with no/small backlog. And generally, they don’t. Even complex Titanium and Iconel duct assemblies and components (like in bleed air routing) have lead times in excess of 18-24 months.
Click to expand...
Demonstrator fly since 2019..
 
At least three aerospace companies rapidly designed and flew something “that demonstrated some things”. Not all as fast as Boeing, but still fast. Boeing has a record of “design, build, fly, but quickly” going back to BoP, which was also done cheaply, natch.
 
Training_Dummy said:
Here’s a non shitty article but all of this came out during the digital century series discussion in 2020

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/ropers-ngad-bombshell/
Click to expand...
He doesn’t mention anything about that sort of timeline (18 months) in that article or any other as far as I’ve read over the years. Hence my confusion as to where that timeline originated from.

We know that the “clean sheet” started in 2016 - and with first flight being in 2019, that’s more like 36 months +/- 7 or 8 months depending on where in the calendar year award/FF occurred. And that’s more than likely with technology transfer/carryover from previous research/designs. “Clean sheet” is hardly that when they’ve been researching tailless stealth planforms since the early 2010s. Nonetheless, even that timeline (36 +/- 7 months) is incredibly impressive, and yet far more realistic given the task.

It’s likely that they used off the shelf components and designs where possible to shorten the development timeline, as do most demonstrators/prototypes. But things like complex bleed air ducting (which would most certainly be unique to the aircraft) with lead times of 18-24 months make an 18-month timeframe impossible even just from a airframe-build standpoint.
 
Bro i know I’m trying to walk a fine line of newly registered users given enough hints to do the work themselves without fucking spoonfeeding them like we are a free version of udm=14 for aerospace/defense matters. oh shit i think quellish’s quiet war might be more effective than he knows.
 
I would appreciate less of the hip street talk. This is an international forum for researchers and enthusiasts, with English being a second language at best for many visitors.
Less of the oblique, more clarity of expression, please?
Signed - Arjen, keeping up with new idiom for 66 years in Dutch - and English for a while less.
 
Training_Dummy said:
Bro i know I’m trying to walk a fine line of newly registered users given enough hints to do the work themselves without fucking spoonfeeding them like we are a free version of udm=14 for aerospace/defense matters. oh shit i think quellish’s quiet war might be more effective than he knows.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it was asking much to get the source on that information. I read through all ~43 pages from the other thread and saw a number of claims that don’t make sense to me given the lack of supporting evidence. I couldn’t find any information in the public space to justify these claims, so I decided to question the claim. But if i’m misunderstanding what you were saying here then feel free to correct me.

As for my own opinions, I’m just giving information based on my experience as someone who has experience in the industry. But I can understand the hesitation to place any stock in what a newly registered user says.
 
zebra159357 said:
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/f-47-air-force-mid-2030s-top-lawmaker/
Click to expand...
Air Force Gen. Dale White, who oversees some of the service’s most critical programs as Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapon Systems, declined to comment at the McAleese conference when asked what stage the F-47 program will be in the mid-2030s.

The first flight goal of 2028 remains unchanged, White said, and he expressed confidence in the progression of the F-47.
Click to expand...
 
vanishingelephant said:
That's good pace for a plane that'll have its EMD-prototype flight a couple of years from now. Around 6 years or so from EMD to initial service is brisk.
Click to expand...
Fast but probably not Digital Century Series fast... From Roper saying this in 2020,
“I hope to have the acquisition plan for NGAD rolling into the Digital Century Series this summer. I don’t want to go more specific than that and timeline and drumbeat for the team, because I have given them an unprecedented task.”
Click to expand...
to be expecting entry into service in the early to mid 2030s... Roper must be disappointed.
 
vanishingelephant said:
That's good pace for a plane that'll have its EMD-prototype flight a couple of years from now. Around 6 years or so from EMD to initial service is brisk.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing first squadron or two won't IOC until mid 2030s which is about what one would expect given the timeline with first flight expected in 2028 IMO. Would like to see first squadron IOC in say 2032-2033 but if they do IOC in 2035 that's a win IMO.
 
F-35: Awarded 2001 -> IOC 2015 -> 14 years
B-21: Awarded 2015 -> IOC 2027-2028 -> 12-13 years
T-7: Awarded 2018 -> first flight 2023 -> IOC 2028? 10 years
F-47: Awarded 2025 -> IOC 2035? -> 10 years

2035 for IOC would already be a fairly impressive pace for a cutting-edge fighter. For anyone saying it will be faster than that, I'll believe it when I see it.
 
Last edited:
Safran gets under US Congress scrutiny for their activities in China (Safran is rumored to be the main Landing gear contractor for NGAD) :

In a letter to Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth, Republican Representative John Moolenaar said the French company's activities in China may be aiding the Chinese military, and cited Safran's work with the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (600862.SS), opens new tab, or AVIC, among other issues. Moolenaar heads the House of Representatives Select Committee on China.
Click to expand...

https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...agon-review-safran-ventures-china-2026-03-20/
 
This is not new information, but the FY27 skinny PB reaffirms a first flight goal of 2028:

"The 2027 request continues to prioritize the
rapid development and production of the F-47, and would achieve a first flight in 2028."
 
Last edited:
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/f-47-2027-2028-projected-budget-development/
The Air Force in April asked for more than $5 billion in research, development, test and evaluation funding for the Boeing-made F-47 in fiscal 2027, up from nearly $3.5 billion in total spending in fiscal 2026. In fiscal 2028, the Air Force expects that spending to rise to nearly $5.3 billion.

But in the three years that follow, R&D spending for the F-47 will steadily drop until reaching under $3 billion in fiscal 2031.

F-47 Budget​

YEAR202620272028202920302031
(In billions)$3.45$5.04$5.25$4.12$3.29$2.95
Similarly, the Next-Generation Adaptive Propulsion, or NGAP, program’s R&D spending is set to rise from its fiscal 2025 funding of $490 million to a requested $514 million in 2027.

That spending is projected to spike in 2028, hitting nearly $906 million, before ticking downward to $865 million in 2029. In fiscal 2030 and 2031, spending is expected to steeply decline to $303 million and $305 million.

NGAP Budget​

YEAR202620272028202920302031
In millions$326$513.70$905.70$865$303.30$304.90
Heather Penney, the director of studies and research at AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, said the projected funding patterns suggest that by about 2029, the Air Force will have largely finished with the most challenging parts of the R&D process on both programs and could be shifting into the engineering and manufacturing development phase.
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom