Boeing F-47 NGAD - Speculation and Theories

The derivative implications of accommodating a future A102/103s and an interim engine’s potentially differing airflow requirements are interesting.

Maybe increment 1 flies with a tighter permitted envelope with special care given to flying high AoA at certain power settings or avoiding throttle transients, etc.

Or perhaps Boeing has a clever solution that robustly adapts to all kinds of engine airflow particulars - im reminded of that seashell inlet idea….
 
About Boeing Assembly and Test Park:

Phase 1: ≈1.4~1.5 million ft²
North: Core areas including Assembly, Hangar, and RCS
East: Brownleigh area + pilot facilities
Figure 3: Phase 1 + Phase 2 Total: Approximately 2,612,000 ft (~242,700 sq m) "Future Concept Expansion"

Paving the way for the manufacture of the F-47!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20260610_233807.jpg
    IMG_20260610_233807.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 332
  • Screenshot_2026_0610_234249.png
    Screenshot_2026_0610_234249.png
    48.4 KB · Views: 108
  • IMG_20260610_235739.jpg
    IMG_20260610_235739.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 202
wtna7 said:
About Boeing Assembly and Test Park:

Phase 1: ≈1.4~1.5 million ft²
North: Core areas including Assembly, Hangar, and RCS
East: Brownleigh area + pilot facilities
Figure 3: Phase 1 + Phase 2 Total: Approximately 2,612,000 ft (~242,700 sq m) "Future Concept Expansion"

Paving the way for the manufacture of the F-47!
Click to expand...
Its going to be an exciting living here for the next few years. Whenever I drive by I always hoping some UFO looking thing is going to fly past but... so far its been southwest airlines and a single F-16.
 
skyblue said:
Darold Cummings is clearly not excited about the Boeing design from an aero/stealth stand point, at least what can be surmised of it. The J-36 looks a whole lot like his own preferred configuration, except with a third engine.
Click to expand...
Wasn't his "work on the YF-23" outlets like TWZ like to reference basically providing napkin drawings that others then refined into more concrete and usable schematics?

Either way, one has to assume that Boeing's Phantom Works is filled to the brim with capable and seasoned engineers and designers. People who are active, who have worked with modern tools and software, software and hardware available to them in order to model and validate their proposed designs that would make your heart jump for joy (for AVIC for example, they have allocated timeslots to run their stuff on China's most capable supercomputers). They're not stuck in the 80s. I have plenty of confidence that Boeing has chosen their respective design for a multitude of valid reasons. Same thing can be assumed for the people at the experimental development division of CAC. Ultimately differences and deviations reflect user preference and design requirements, different priorities.
 
If the Chinese come up with an adequate adaptive cycle engine, I don’t believe they will have three engines. I suspect the center engine is configured for Cruise fuel efficiency.
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's more surprising that the F-22 wasn't guessed, it's an amazingly normal design.

The F-23 is quite a bit farther from typical design concepts.
Click to expand...
It's hard to guess either of them if you aren't on a LO/VLO train...
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's more surprising that the F-22 wasn't guessed, it's an amazingly normal design.
Click to expand...
Which is why it wasn't guessed. Everybody was drawing canard-deltas. The F-22 was more "normal" than even some of the prior F-X competitors (Republic & NA for example). Personally, I was expecting something more like the J-20, though I'll admit when they rolled out the YF-23 I was like, "never mind, this will do".
 
Sferrin said:
Lots of people were thinking of stealth but they were thinking swoopy curves instead of hard edges and edge-alignment.

View attachment 817472
Click to expand...
Well, pretty much original ATF requirement - 0.5m2 frontal (apparently, clean). Other 4.5 gen fighters weren't terribly worse than that(for just a portion of resources).

What changed looks - and results - was the revised requirement.
 
Ainen said:
Well, pretty much original ATF requirement - 0.5m2 frontal (apparently, clean). Other 4.5 gen fighters weren't terribly worse than that(for just a portion of resources).

What changed looks - and results - was the revised requirement.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about the difference between the public vs those in the know (primarily NG & Lockheed). Even after the USAF made the stealth requirement stricter it didn't change what was conceptualized in the public. I mean look at all the controversy the Testor's "F-19" generated for supposedly "leaking" secrets by combining "swoopy" with the Blackbird, even incorporating the Blackbird's "stealth paint".
 

Attachments

  • modelairplanemaker_250425_680bf771293be.jpg
    modelairplanemaker_250425_680bf771293be.jpg
    105.3 KB · Views: 202
Think there could be a comeback of swoopy edges with some new way to stealth?
 
FlyGuy369 said:
Think there could be a comeback of swoopy edges with some new way to stealth?
Click to expand...
Doubt it (but I'm no expert). If you're not using edge alignment to optimize/attenuate your return then you'd need a lot more RAM/RAS. Probably more than is practical. Consider they don't even do that in anechoic chambers and those don't have to fly.
 
Last edited:
My apologies if it’s up the thread somewhere. But these “images” what percentage of “real” are they?

What are the experts members thoughts? Is it a tailless canard?
 
Sferrin said:
I mean look at all the controversy the Testor's "F-19" generated for supposedly "leaking" secrets by combining "swoopy" with the Blackbird, even incorporating the Blackbird's "stealth paint".
Click to expand...
bobbymike said:
My apologies if it’s up the thread somewhere. But these “images” what percentage of “real” are they?

What are the experts members thoughts? Is it a tailless canard?
Click to expand...
Most if not all the guessing has been informed by past planform concepts and more or less confirmed by what the Chinese 6th gens look like. I dont expect the end result to look exactly like the project fear fighter or the renders necessarily, but planform wise, it would be surprising if it wasnt some combination of planform/ characteristics already investigated in those MDD designs or from past demostrators.

If the shape over area 51 is indeed associated with this program, it still isnt the final design since thats probably still being designed / built. But if you just go off the demonstrator, then yes you might be a little off the mark. However it does suggest that the end result probably isnt something conventional looking either.

I will say though, as far as art work and guessing goes, I think people SPF will have gotten the closest. We ought to start a raffle and give out a community prize to the best prediction when the day comes around
 
Sferrin said:
Which is why it wasn't guessed. Everybody was drawing canard-deltas. The F-22 was more "normal" than even some of the prior F-X competitors (Republic & NA for example). Personally, I was expecting something more like the J-20, though I'll admit when they rolled out the YF-23 I was like, "never mind, this will do".
Click to expand...
Wasnt one of the Lockheed ATF designs basically a canard F-22?
 
Never. And now please stop offtopic.
 

Attachments

  • ats13101_f22_4.jpg
    ats13101_f22_4.jpg
    48.5 KB · Views: 228
  • Lockheed-Boeing-GD ATF evolution_2.gif
    Lockheed-Boeing-GD ATF evolution_2.gif
    189.1 KB · Views: 238
flateric said:
Never. And now please stop offtopic.
Click to expand...

Interesting how close we came to having two v-tail aircraft in the run-off for the ATF program! Some people might today assume that v-tails were one of the requirements for a '5th generation' design if that'd been the case.
 

Attachments

  • HN5toj_bUAAxLMA.jpg
    HN5toj_bUAAxLMA.jpg
    164.5 KB · Views: 107
Last edited:
fightingirish said:
Hello everyone, I recently came across this on X (formerly Twitter). I have not yet located an official source.
Click to expand...
Was there any source for the picture? I haven't seen anything like that on Boeing X accounts. The shape of the canopy and the window in the fuselage make very little sense. The light outline does not look real.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fightingirish said:
Hello everyone, I recently came across this on X (formerly Twitter). I have not yet located an official source.
Click to expand...

In the era of easy AI images, a random account with 1.6k followers on the most degenerate, bot-infested, brainrot platforms in the history of the internet posts a random image with no source, and you ran here immediately to tell us all about this?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sferrin said:
This flew almost 30 years ago.
Click to expand...
X36, was a Drone, not a fighter. Was fraction size. and was Controlled remotely at a top speed of 180, not 600 mph. Certainly never broke sound barrier. Never hoisted fighter maneuvers. Never flew above 20,0000 feet. When you fly in straight lines everything's peachy keen.
 

Attachments

  • Hoisting_X-36.jpg
    Hoisting_X-36.jpg
    499 KB · Views: 269
  • X-36_Remote_Cockpit.jpg
    X-36_Remote_Cockpit.jpg
    517.7 KB · Views: 267
Last edited by a moderator:
joshjosh said:
In the era of easy AI images, a random account with 1.6k followers on the most degenerate, bot-infested, brainrot platforms in the history of the internet posts a random image with no source, and you ran here immediately to tell us all about this?
Click to expand...
Hey @joshjosh, since I have not yet found another or an official source, I posted the picture in this topic "Boeing F-47 NGAD - Speculation and Theories" and not in the real topic "Boeing F-47 NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) NEWS ONLY ".;)
 
spikedpsycho said:
View attachment 818702

X36, was a Drone, not a fighter. Was fraction size. and was Controlled remotely at a top speed of 180, not 600 mph. Certainly never broke sound barrier. Never hoisted fighter maneuvers. Never flew above 20,0000 feet. When you fly in straight lines everything's peachy keen. View attachment 818703
Click to expand...
Everybody knows all that. Doesn't change anything.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom