Boeing F-47 NGAD - Speculation and Theories

[Raider]

I still find that hard to believe. I'm still leaning towards NG for FAXX.

Id say so.

NG for B-21 and FAAX. They demonstrated an amazing ability to procure the Raider thus far.

LMCO is busy with F-35 and a potential something else that is really fast. I suspect this additional aircraft is low production and reliant on adaptive cycle engines, where as the F-47 has been flying with a standard low bypass turbofan of around 29k thrust.

Boeing has plenty of F-15ex to complete as well as the F-47.

 

[Raider]

The 103 guys seem awfully excited. ..

 

[FlyGuy369]

The 103 guys seem awfully excited. ..

Gonna tell us what the F47 looks like with this engine? Lol.

 

[dark sidius]

Look like this

 

[Raider]

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2026/03...-raptor-and-the-f-47-isnt-coming-until-2030s/

 

[lmaoxd]

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2026/03...-raptor-and-the-f-47-isnt-coming-until-2030s/

While multiple chinese 6th gen prototypes are alr flying. A chinese invasion of taiwan is looking a lot easier in the near future

 

[Sferrin]

While multiple chinese 6th gen prototypes are alr flying. A chinese invasion of taiwan is looking a lot easier in the near future

Good luck with that.

 

[Raider]

As much as I want to see a 6th gen fighter for the technology and childhood fascination, I’m not sure how relevant it will be in future conflicts. Iran and Ukraine is showing them to be almost irrelevant. Going head to head with an equivalent force would only be a disastrous outcome.

The only real benefit becomes projection of power or a true defense posture but, the USA doesn’t play defense….

 

[joshjosh]

As much as I want to see a 6th gen fighter for the technology and childhood fascination, I’m not sure how relevant it will be in future conflicts. Iran and Ukraine is showing them to be almost irrelevant. Going head to head with an equivalent force would only be a disastrous outcome.

The only real benefit becomes projection of power or a true defense posture but, the USA doesn’t play defense….

???

what

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

And this relates to the topic how? Cleanup on Aisle 4.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Bases lost? On paper none, because who in their right mind would admit that anyway.

Bases "lost" (as in unusable for operations) in reality?
https://archive.ph/E8LkF

This level of attacks did not stop US forces in Iraq or Afghanistan from using the bases. If a reporter is saying otherwise, they're pushing an agenda.

I suppose the AN/FPS 132 wasn't a high value asset?

Not to the US, but fair point.

And I suppose KC-135 and E-3 are still in production to offset the losses of the several airframes that were damaged beyond repair?

There's many in the Boneyard we could regenerate and bring into service.

Or we *gasp* buy more E-7s and KC-46s.

Fires happen? Lol. They surely shouldn't happen on a warship, especially not of that scale. Plumbing failing, fire breaking out either due to negligence or intentionally after a several month overstretched deployment putting the carrier out of action for most likely more than a year at best. That's the state of the USN in 2026?

That's been the state of the USN for as long as there's been a USN.

You're doing a lot of dangerous stuff in a very small area. Including handling flammables and explosives. Sometimes things go wrong. Mostly you don't hear about it because there weren't cameras and computers in everyone's hands 24/7 back then. But there are cameras and instant global access now, so now you do hear about things that you didn't used to. Did you know there was a fire in the dryer on USS Narwhal in 1997 or 1998, shortly before she was decommissioned? Or that the auxiliarymen had to rip apart the black-water pumps once a patrol on USS Georgia 01-02?

Especially when the media has an axe to grind about how incompetent the military or the administration is, stories about things going wrong normally get played way way up and other things happening get dropped like they're hot.

Psyops are active and propaganda works both ways.

Yes they are, and yes it does.

 

[Raider]

And this relates to the topic how? Cleanup on Aisle 4.

That needed to happen

 

[FroggyFrog]

It is difficult to imagine 2D from 3D.

Similar art based on the P&W artwork from China by 兰墨飞花, as well as some speculated comparisons to their J-50, J-36 and others. Of course the P&W rendering is not the actual F-47, and the specs listed aren't accurate either.

 

[Low IQ Techie]

Similar art based on the P&W artwork from China by 兰墨飞花, as well as some speculated comparisons to their J-50, J-36 and others. Of course the P&W rendering is not the actual F-47, and the specs listed aren't accurate either.

I couldn't find hi-res images by Google Lens. Do you have the original link?

 

[FroggyFrog]

I couldn't find hi-res images by Google Lens. Do you have the original link?

From https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1bgP5z2EFD/

And here also another one with speculated side views:

 

[Low IQ Techie]

From https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1bgP5z2EFD/

And here also another one with speculated side views:

Need to register & login for video beyond 360p

 

[Raider]

Interesting

 

[dark sidius]

From https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1bgP5z2EFD/

And here also another one with speculated side views:

Pratt and Whitney debunking work very well

 

[TwoTribes]

I couldn't find hi-res images by Google Lens. Do you have the original link?

https://weibo.com/2011947345/QudiJoUfh

 

[Low IQ Techie]

https://weibo.com/2011947345/QudiJoUfh

Google Lens couldn't search Weibo

 

[dark sidius]

https://weibo.com/2011947345/QudiJoUfh

This F-47 model is disinformation it look like a modified F-22.

 

[wtna7]

The primary manufacturing facility for the F-47 (the U.S. Air Force's NGAD (Next Generation Advanced Defense) fighter jet program) is located at Boeing's factory in St. Louis, Missouri.

(Image: Progress from 2023 to 2026 (right))

 

[Training_Dummy]

Thanks @wtna7

was just wondering how it was going in St Louis. If the reports that increment 1 will use an existing engine are true perhaps F-47 flies sooner than if the program was trying to sync the first spiral and A102/103 availability.

My crude math suggests that twin F110-129 could give enough for maaaybe 1,500nm combat range and if the inlet is shaped & sized thoughtfully maybe there’s enough bleed air cooling opportunity to achieve some useful fraction of what a third stream can deliver.

 

[Raider]

Quite an astute speculation.

 

[wtna7]

All I can say is that the diagram shows the progress, and it is expected that some measures can be implemented by 2026, while 1.1 million square feet are expected to be completed by 2030!

 

[insidersource]

If the reports that increment 1 will use an existing engine are true perhaps F-47 flies sooner than if the program was trying to sync the first spiral and A102/103 availability.

That will just be misreporting. The Boeing 6th gen demonstrator flew with existing engines and Boeing US Navy 6th gen submission requires existing engines with bigger generators. This makes it very confusing for the average reporter. The USAF version will only enter service with the XA102/XA103.

They might however repeat what Eurofighter did. The first two production representative prototypes flew with RB199 Tornado engines instead of the EJ200. This allowed flight testing to begin. Normally the flight testing aircraft never enter service. Flight testing will take a year or so. That gives even more time for the XA102/XA103 to be ready.

 

[Raider]

I would guess a large portion of flight testing has been accomplished at Groom Lake with F110 powerplants. XA engine are still a few years out. They might be ready once Boeings plant is ready to complete airframes and I would imagine a flight test program similar to what the B-21 is carrying out- production-ready test beds the transition it deliverables.

 

[quellish]

That will just be misreporting. The Boeing 6th gen demonstrator flew with existing engines and Boeing US Navy 6th gen submission requires existing engines with bigger generators. This makes it very confusing for the average reporter. The USAF version will only enter service with the XA102/XA103.

Please provide sources, particularly the “bigger generators” claim.
On this forum we generally discourage making things up unless it’s in the appropriate section of the forum.

 

[quellish]

I would guess a large portion of flight testing has been accomplished at Groom Lake with F110 powerplants. XA engine are still a few years out. They might be ready once Boeings plant is ready to complete airframes and I would imagine a flight test program similar to what the B-21 is carrying out- production-ready test beds the transition it deliverables.

Flight testing of a demonstrator with adaptive engines was done at Groom Lake and it was a total Charlie Foxtrot, using an engine the press has (sob sob) not described.

I have no idea why the forum is so focused on the F110 when the available record refutes this.

Lack of imagination or lack of documentation?

 

[insidersource]

Please provide sources, particularly the “bigger generators” claim.

Increased electricity generation is a key feature of 6th gen fighters. Dozens of sources report this. This is common knowledge.

Flight testing of a demonstrator with adaptive engines was done at Groom Lake and it was a total Charlie Foxtrot, using an engine the press has (sob sob) not described.

That was the Lockheed NGAD demonstrator that had its first flight within 6 months of the XA100/XA101 engines ground testing.

This is the Boeing speculation thread. The flight testing done by Boeing was for their demonstrator built for the Navy. The Navy was clear that they wanted a modified version of an existing engine. This means bigger generators are a bare minimum.

I have no idea why the forum is so focused on the F110 when the available record refutes this.

Please provide sources, that the Boeing demonstrator that flew in 2019 did not use the F110. Or that it used an adaptive engine.

On this forum we generally discourage making things up unless it’s in the appropriate section of the forum.

 

[insidersource]

I would guess a large portion of flight testing has been accomplished at Groom Lake with F110 powerplants. XA engine are still a few years out.

We know that the Boeing demonstrator that was built for the Navy has already flown. If the Boeing F-47 getting built for the USAF has significant aerodynamic changes then a large portion of the flight testing won't be accomplished by the demonstrator.

However if the Boeing demonstrator was 99% representative of the production aircraft and the USAF is simply getting a land based version then the flight testing of the demonstrator could be carried over. Many members here do not think this is the case. This will be settled in a couple months when the Navy selects their aircraft.

 

[JetBrain]

Increased electricity generation is a key feature of 6th gen fighters. Dozens of sources report this. This is common knowledge.


That was the Lockheed NGAD demonstrator that had its first flight within 6 months of the XA100/XA101 engines ground testing.

This is the Boeing speculation thread. The flight testing done by Boeing was for their demonstrator built for the Navy. The Navy was clear that they wanted a modified version of an existing engine. This means bigger generators are a bare minimum.


Please provide sources, that the Boeing demonstrator that flew in 2019 did not use the F110. Or that it used an adaptive engine.

On this forum we generally discourage making things up unless it’s in the appropriate section of the forum.

That was the Lockheed NGAD demonstrator that had its first flight within 6 months of the XA100/XA101 engines ground testing.

Is there any report or video for that？

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Flight testing of a demonstrator with adaptive engines was done at Groom Lake and it was a total Charlie Foxtrot, using an engine the press has (sob sob) not described.

I have no idea why the forum is so focused on the F110 when the available record refutes this.

Lack of imagination or lack of documentation?

In the absence of published information, people are making stuff up. Nobody has time to actually do research.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Please provide sources, particularly the “bigger generators” claim.
On this forum we generally discourage making things up unless it’s in the appropriate section of the forum.

Please provide sources, that the Boeing demonstrator that flew in 2019 did not use the F110. Or that it used an adaptive engine.
On this forum we generally discourage making things up unless it’s in the appropriate section of the forum.

One of these posters has a 19 year record of deep archival research and excellent posts. The other one is @insidersource.

This is a speculation topic though. Perhaps we need a News Only topic?

 

[Sferrin]

Flight testing of a demonstrator with adaptive engines was done at Groom Lake and it was a total Charlie Foxtrot, using an engine the press has (sob sob) not described.

I have no idea why the forum is so focused on the F110 when the available record refutes this.

Apparently nobody else has heard that an adaptive engine had ever flown. NGAP doesn't seem close at all, and that would seem to leave one of the engines being proposed for the F-35 upgrade that was cancelled. Or the F110 as the F100 seems to be out of favor for new builds.

 

[insidersource]

Is there any report or video for that？

Yes there is. All has been reported by multiple sources.

Boeing’s aircraft, which first flew in 2019, therefore appears to be the full-scale flight demonstrator that Dr. Will Roper, then Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, announced in 2020. “We’ve already built and flown a full-scale flight demonstrator in the real world, and we broke records in doing it,” Roper said during the Air, Space and Cyber Conference 2020.

As for the second X-plane, the Lockheed Martin demonstrator which flew in 2022, this is the first time it is officially mentioned.

https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/23/darpa-ngad-x-planes/

Then we have the XA100 and XA101 engines manufacturing ground testing started in 2021 and finished in 2022 where they were handed over to the USAF. This missed the Boeing first flight by many years. Perfect timing for the Lockheed first flight.

September 13, 2022 - GE Aviation's XA100 adaptive cycle engine is ready to progress from prototype into development following testing with the U.S. Air Force, the manufacturer said.

https://www.flyingmag.com/ge-aviation-concludes-testing-f-35-adaptive-cycle-engine-prototype/

Both XA100 and XA101 engine missed the Boeing demonstrator first flight by many years. The engines were collected by the Air Force in 2022. Then you add the information provided by Quellish which is 100% correct.

Flight testing of a demonstrator with adaptive engines was done at Groom Lake and it was a total Charlie Foxtrot, using an engine the press has (sob sob) not described.

Being a total Charlie Foxtrot would also explain why LM lost NGAD. I heard the same thing but I don't know if it was an engine integration issue or an airframe issue.

Also many sources between 2018-2022 mentioned that the USAF NGAD and it's demonstrator was going to be big and very long range. A pair of XA100/XA101 aligns perfectly with that.

 

[insidersource]

Apparently nobody else has heard that an adaptive engine had ever flown. NGAP doesn't seem close at all, and that would seem to leave one of the engines being proposed for the F-35 upgrade that was cancelled.

If you go back to AETP engine news from 2018-2019 the primary goal of the XA100 and XA101 engines were to power a 6th gen fighter.

David Tweedie, general manager for advanced combat engines at GE said:

Though one of the prime potential uses for the fruits of the AETP is a sixth-gen fighter,

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/...-revolutionary-adaptive-cycle-fighter-engine/

The USAF thought it would be great idea for NGAD to effectively be a twin engine F-35 both sharing the same adaptive engines. Just like the F-15/F-16 combo. So Lockheed sized the demonstrator for two F-35 sized adaptive engines.

When Trump said the F-55 is a twin engine F-35 he would be referencing the Lockheed proposal in competion with the Boeing F-47.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I guess we need to revisit the 3 streams engine topics, ADVENT, AETD and AETP. An airborne demonstrator engine seems possible around 2020 within the disclosed information from 2017.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/aetp-three-stream-vce-ge-xa100-and-p-w-xa101-engines.28976
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/adaptive-versatile-engine-technology-advent.22564

 

[FlyGuy369]

Slowly turning into the 6th Gen multiverse of madness.

 

[Reddington777]

the primary goal of the XA100 and XA101 engines were to power a 6th gen fighter.

David Tweedie, general manager for advanced combat engines at GE said:
Though one of the prime potential uses for the fruits of the AETP is a sixth-gen fighter,

"Prime potential use" =/= "primary goal"

About 50 something pages ago, we went through this already.

The "primary goal" of AETP was to fit an adaptive cycling engine on the F-35. This was not just reported on. It was said by kendall and multiple big wigs. NGAP was both a derivative and parallel development whose "primary purpose" was to be the main powerplants of NGAD - not AETP.

IIRC you were pushing this because it fits your big LM battlecruiser NGAD narrative...which, like this AETP idea, also wasnt a thing.

It was vaguely floated that AETP could power a 6th gen fighter, but no... that was not the "primary goal"