Boeing F-47 NGAD - Speculation and Theories

BDF said:
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.
Click to expand...
Forest Green said:
With a first flight goal of 2028, it was never going to arrive before the mid-2030s. I mean the F-22 (not YF-22) first flew in 1997 and it entered service in 2005.
Click to expand...


I don't want to stick my neck out too far, but – and YES, this timeline is realistic, anything else would be wishful thinking – the US wouldn't be ahead of China anymore, because by the mid-2030s both the CAC J-36 and the SAC J-XDS will already be in service. I don't want to commit myself, and certainly not bet, but by 2030 at the latest – probably sooner – I expect with almost absolute certainty that the first pre-serial/LRIP machines will have been delivered and are in use by one of the FTTB brigades.
 
Deino said:
I don't want to stick my neck out too far, but – and YES, this timeline is realistic, anything else would be wishful thinking – the US wouldn't be ahead of China anymore, because by the mid-2030s both the CAC J-36 and the SAC J-XDS will already be in service. I don't want to commit myself, and certainly not bet, but by 2030 at the latest – probably sooner – I expect with almost absolute certainty that the first pre-serial/LRIP machines will have been delivered and are in use by one of the FTTB brigades.
Click to expand...
Of course the F-47 could leapfrog them. Would be like the "good old days" with the USSR. They're ahead then we're ahead, etc. (That's assuming a J-XDS would outperform the F-22. Not a given. )
 
Deino said:
I don't want to stick my neck out too far, but – and YES, this timeline is realistic, anything else would be wishful thinking – the US wouldn't be ahead of China anymore, because by the mid-2030s both the CAC J-36 and the SAC J-XDS will already be in service. I don't want to commit myself, and certainly not bet, but by 2030 at the latest – probably sooner – I expect with almost absolute certainty that the first pre-serial/LRIP machines will have been delivered and are in use by one of the FTTB brigades.
Click to expand...
Concur that it's possible.
 
TomcatViP said:
Safran gets under US Congress scrutiny for their activities in China (Safran is rumored to be the main Landing gear contractor for NGAD) :



Click to expand...
Why does the US rely on a french contractor for such a vital component to their most high profile aviation program in decades?

Is nobody in the US capable of designing and constructing a landing gear and it's components?
 
Safran Landing Systems:

The company can be traced to the establishment of a 50/50 joint venture in 1995 between France's Messier and the United Kingdom's Dowty Group, then owned by TI Group. Messier-Dowty was purchased outright from TI Group by the SNECMA group in 1998. The 2005 merger of SAGEM and SNECMA made Messier-Dowty part of the new Safran company. In May 2011, Messier-Bugatti-Dowty was formed through the merger of three Safran subsidiaries: Messier-Dowty, Messier-Bugatti and Messier Services. In May 2016, Messier-Bugatti-Dowty became Safran Landing Systems.
Click to expand...

en.wikipedia.org

Safran Landing Systems - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

We made the hypothesis at the time (we were the first to notice a market communication linking Safran to NGAD) that, either the landing mass or MGTOW limitation made the requirements for a Landing Gear specialist a necessity.
It give us a chance then to first guess on the overall size of the aircraft.
 
Last edited:
So US suppliers are indeed incapable of delivering the necessary solutions, got it.
 
EmoBirb said:
Why does the US rely on a french contractor for such a vital component to their most high profile aviation program in decades?
Click to expand...
That's just the current state of the law and regulations. You could certainly make an argument on the grounds of defense industrial base concerns to exclude foreign countries from making certain items, but current Buy American provisions treat companies from France, along with 27 other countries, as if they were domestic suppliers. Back in my day (ancient times), we put a 10 percent bid differential penalty on foreign primes and subs, but this is the era of globalization...or something.
 
kmrumble said:
That's just the current state of the law and regulations. You could certainly make an argument on the grounds of defense industrial base concerns to exclude foreign countries from making certain items, but current Buy American provisions treat companies from France, along with 27 other countries, as if they were domestic suppliers. Back in my day (ancient times), we put a 10 percent bid differential penalty on foreign primes and subs, but this is the era of globalization...or something.
Click to expand...
And it can get more complicated than that. For instance Rolls Royce makes the F-35B lift system buuuut:

www.rolls-royce.com

LibertyWorks

At the forefront of military technology
www.rolls-royce.com www.rolls-royce.com

(Formerly Allison Advanced Development.)

en.wikipedia.org

Allison Engine Company - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Sferrin said:
Are you ignorant or just a troll?

Collins Aerospace supplies the F-35s and B-21s landing gear.
Click to expand...
And yet a french contractor is doing so for the F-47. This hasn't anything to do with ignorance or trolling. It's just hilarious to witness that the most high profile aviation program in American history, under the presidency of a guy who pretends to be all about American interests, ultimately relies on french engineering to start and land safely.
 
kmrumble said:
That's just the current state of the law and regulations. You could certainly make an argument on the grounds of defense industrial base concerns to exclude foreign countries from making certain items, but current Buy American provisions treat companies from France, along with 27 other countries, as if they were domestic suppliers. Back in my day (ancient times), we put a 10 percent bid differential penalty on foreign primes and subs, but this is the era of globalization...or something.
Click to expand...
I figured that at least at one point the US had measures in place to keep foreign contractors out of the competition. Now the exact opposite is the case. Must've been something on Boeings end of the Business that Safran got in. Even more surprising that Boeing won the contract when they rely on such crucial components being sourced from foreign countries. One has to think that Lockheed Martin probably picked an American contractor.
 
EmoBirb said:
And yet a french contractor is doing so for the F-47. This hasn't anything to do with ignorance or trolling. It's just hilarious to witness that the most high profile aviation program in American history, under the presidency of a guy who pretends to be all about American interests, ultimately relies on french engineering to start and land safely.
Click to expand...
No, that's just who they hired to do it. Could be others didn't have the bandwidth.
 
Let's be honest a lot of NATO & allied aircrafts do have technology based on NATO & allied research. If you look up a lot of them were done and led by the French and Germans, some by the rest.
 
kmrumble said:
That's just the current state of the law and regulations. You could certainly make an argument on the grounds of defense industrial base concerns to exclude foreign countries from making certain items, but current Buy American provisions treat companies from France, along with 27 other countries, as if they were domestic suppliers. Back in my day (ancient times), we put a 10 percent bid differential penalty on foreign primes and subs, but this is the era of globalization...or something.
Click to expand...
Combined Response:
EmoBirb said:
I figured that at least at one point the US had measures in place to keep foreign contractors out of the competition. Now the exact opposite is the case. Must've been something on Boeings end of the Business that Safran got in. Even more surprising that Boeing won the contract when they rely on such crucial components being sourced from foreign countries. One has to think that Lockheed Martin probably picked an American contractor.
Click to expand...
Even with general WTO rules, for defense products the domestic contractor can be up to 50% higher price and still be valid as the "lowest bidder", without running into the protectionism statutes.
 
dark sidius said:
Sometimes you need to show the toys for adversary like China do with the J-36 , at moment there is a need to show the muscle, if you have black aircraft in reserve you must show it for deterence sometimes , if they stay all the time in hangar it stay just a legend.
Click to expand...

Yep. Remember the two “mystery craft” sightings in 2014 over Amarillo and Wichita? Two very different airplanes that just happened to get caught in broad daylight.

I do recall that both DPRK and Russia were rattling their respective sabres around the time both sightings were made. Not entirely dissimilar from “Blackbird Diplomacy” of days gone by. Sometimes it doesn’t hurt to remind the other guy that you haven’t been sitting on your hands all this time…
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom