US Navy 6th Gen Fighter - F/A-XX

Scott Kenny said:
Those are nowhere near powerful enough for a plane that will be at least the size of a Tomcat.
Click to expand...
That depends on TWR you want; GCAP consorsium doesn't appear to be bothered.
And iirc there are indications FA-XX won't be especially super size.
 
Ainen said:
That depends on TWR you want;
Click to expand...
TWR > 1 at 50% fuel with full air-to-air loadout. Basic fighter standard.

40klbs empty weight, ~8klbs of ordnance, and ~14klbs of fuel means a minimum of 62,000lbs of thrust is required. That's 31-35k per engine.

F-22 standard would be TWR >1 at takeoff with full fuel and air-to-air loadout. minimum 40k per engine.



Ainen said:
GCAP consorsium doesn't appear to be bothered.
Click to expand...
GCAP consortium isn't bothering right now with the demonstrator. They aren't using EJ200s for the actual GCAP, but something bigger.



Ainen said:
And iirc there are indications FA-XX won't be especially super size.
Click to expand...
If it cannot carry 4x GBU-31s internally, what's the point of buying FAXX versus more F-35Cs?
 
Scott Kenny said:
GCAP consortium isn't bothering right now with the demonstrator. They aren't using EJ200s for the actual GCAP, but something bigger.
Click to expand...
They specifically said they aren't aiming for a very high TWR for the eventual fighter, not for the demo.
Scott Kenny said:
If it cannot carry 4x GBU-31s internally, what's the point of buying FAXX versus more F-35Cs?
Click to expand...
Why are 4 GBU-31s internally so important? The goal is to replace F/A-18E/F; why not 4 blackbeard/jsow?
 
HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION, SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE
(May and June 2025)

Ellzey:

General Caine, in his prepared statement, states that the F-47 will continue to ensure U.S. air dominance for decades. I am a fervent supporter of not only F-47 but whatever the F/A-XX is going to turn out to be. And I want to make that clear to everyone listening.

Our Navy, our Joint Force, and our future combatant commanders need the Navy's sixth-generation fighter, the F/A- XX. Relying only on the Air Force's sixth-generation fighter does not solve our air superiority challenge because whether they are coming from Guam or Diego Garcia, the DMPIs are already set and the missiles are already guided. It is a nonmoving target. An aircraft carrier moves its DMPI every 30 seconds.

So we can't do either of those with only the Air Force's planned buy. So we either want to win or we don't, and I know we want to win. We have to do it with the F/A-XX.

A 3-year delay is a de facto cancellation and win for China, and they are watching. Don't take my word for it. They are conducting unrestricted warfare against us right now.

And, if you read the Thirty-Six guidelines from the Sixth Century and they talk about how do you defeat an enemy--or Sun Tzu--you defeat them at home with fentanyl, by taking out our military members before they can even join, 70,000 a year. They are being successful in how they are doing unrestricted warfare, and that is exactly what they are conducting.

They are also showing us their sixth-generation aircraft right now. And there is at least three that we know they are working on. We can't give the field to them and say, ``Fifth- generation is okay for the Navy, but it is not the Air Force.'' We must have both.

So several well-informed, well-respected leaders shared with us the importance of having both the Air Force and the Navy sixth-generation fighters, Admiral Paparo, General Allvin, and Admiral Kilby, acting CNO.

I am not going to put you all on the spot, but I just want to make it clear. If you would like to address it, you may. I am just putting it that it is that important to me.


So what troubles me about the Pentagon needing to be a triangle now is that--one of my favorite movies is ``Office Space.'' You remember Milton? Milton down there with the Swingline? We are not really sure what he did, but he sure made a lot of trouble for everybody.

I think we have a lot of Miltons in the systems commands and down there in the Pentagon, maybe at CAPE, who are telling you that we can't do something when we absolutely can. They need to go. So let's get rid of Milton. Let's invest in this generational investment.


I would like to thank General Calvert--Chairman Calvert-- Chairman Calvert for his investment into the F/A-XX and the bill and present to this subcommittee later today. So thank you all. Appreciate it.
Click to expand...

Congressional Record PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 119th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 171 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2025 No. 122

Mr. ELLZEY. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I thank Chairman COLE for his leadership in getting this bill to the floor quickly. The Defense Department cannot afford another 1-year CR.
Mr. Chair, I also thank Chairman CALVERT for his vision and commit- ment, and I thank the subcommittee staff, on both sides of the aisle, for their hard work in crafting this legislation in a very short time.
The bill before us today makes several notable and timely investments. One of the most important investments is the Navy’s sixth-generation fighter, F/A–XX. Our Navy, our joint force, and our future combatant commanders need this aircraft.

Relying only on the Air Force’s sixth-generation fighter, the F–47, does not solve our air superiority challenge. I am a fervent supporter of the F–47 and would have done everything necessary to ensure that it was built. Unfortunately, some in the Pentagon think this is an either/or choice. It is basic math.

We need more airframes, land-based and carrier-based, and we need to complicate our adversary’s targeting. We can’t do either of those with only the Air Force’s planned buy.

We avoid war by ensuring that our enemy knows that we will win. We win with both the F/A–XX and the F–47, not one or the other.

Don’t take my word for it. Our high-ranking uniformed leaders, warriors all, shared with us the importance of having both Air Force and Navy sixth-generation fighters: Admiral Paparo, commander of the INDOPACOM, a man for whom I have worked for, flown with, and highly admire; General Allvin, chief of staff of the Air Force; Admiral Kilby, the Acting CNO; and General Caine, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

These experienced and highly decorated warfighters all see the operational necessity of both generation-six aircraft, so who is against it? Bean counters and academics are against it. Those wearing suits to work, not uniforms. Many are well meaning, but many have earned a nice living telling us we can’t do something when we absolutely can.


I challenge you to wonder if we would have won World War II with those who provide hurdles for us instead of a smooth path. What troubles me is that a couple of scientists, working deep inside the Pentagon in a couple of wings that, frankly, don’t need to be used, have the power to counter the operational assessments of several four-stars. I respect the work they do and the scope with which they do it, but their spreadsheets shouldn’t be the final word. A 3-year delay is a de facto cancellation and a win for China, and China is watching. While they are watching, they are building ships at a torrid pace. They have three generation-six airplanes and aircraft carriers that they are building at an astonishing rate.


China doesn’t want us to build the F/ A–XX because that opens the Davidson window. If we do build it, it closes it. That is exactly why we should.

Mr. Chair, that is exactly why I thank Chairman CALVERT for the generational investment in the F/A–XX. Finally, I am humbled to be standing here in the well of the House representing the patriots of Texas’ Sixth, Americans who believe in a strong national defense.

This bill makes smart investments in defense, in America’s might, and the prevention of war, but, if necessary, winning it.
Click to expand...
 
quellish said:
Ellzey:
I challenge you to wonder if we would have won World War II with those who provide hurdles for us instead of a smooth path. What troubles me is that a couple of scientists, working deep inside the Pentagon in a couple of wings that, frankly, don’t need to be used, have the power to counter the operational assessments of several four-stars.
Click to expand...
Perhaps someone should remind Rep Ellzey it was an Admiral in the forerunner of NAVSYSCOM who insisted there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with the USN's torpedoes....
 
Better hope there's enough other work around to keep Northrop and LockMart in the combat aircraft design game.
 
As I understand it, the rumors from last year that Boeing had won were true, and the delay is due to disputes over how risky it is to award the contract for two 6th gen to Boeing?
 
That looks alot like something else...look closer, may have to unblock insider hahahaha
 
DWG said:
Better hope there's enough other work around to keep Northrop and LockMart in the combat aircraft design game.
Click to expand...
Same thing as when we doubled-up on LockMart for 5th gen. Expect to hear LM flogging for more F-35 upgrades for sure.
 
DWG said:
Better hope there's enough other work around to keep Northrop and LockMart in the combat aircraft design game.
Click to expand...
Lockheed is the big loser of futur , B-21 Northrop high technology program and now Boeing have the 2 futur Fighters, I think that the problems with the F-35 program is a big reason of the lose of all.
 
dark sidius said:
Lockheed is the big loser of futur , B-21 Northrop high technology program and now Boeing have the 2 futur Fighters, I think that the problems with the F-35 program is a big reason of the lose of all.
Click to expand...
Maybe Lockheed has the SR72 and other large scale black world stuff in the pipeline. They seemed to have sleep walked through these two sixth gen RFPs. Apparently their NGAD proposal was relatively conservative compared to Boeing’s and they submitted a design to the Navy that didn’t meet F/A-XX requirements (how does that even happen, lol?).

If the picture at the top of the warzone’s article on the selection announcement is close to what Boeing is actually going to cook up for the F/A-XX, it will look bad ass.
 
DWG said:
Better hope there's enough other work around to keep Northrop and LockMart in the combat aircraft design game.
Click to expand...
F-35 is going to keep them humming happily for a generation (seriously, people forget the *scale* it's being made and operated on), especially when the inevitable "Gen 5.5" refresh happens, and there are CCAs and hypersonic drones yet to design to keep the CADers busy. Weep not for LockMart.

I have to admit, I'm tickled by the symmetry of having both US air services use paired LMT-made single-engine 5th-gen strike-cum-A2A fighters and Boeing-made twin-engine 6th-gen A2A-cum-strike fighters. Now all they need to do is bring back carrier-based bombers and navalize the B-21...
 
dark sidius said:
Me too I bet Northrop :eek:
Click to expand...
Northrop Grumman may still be involved in this. These days multiple contractors are involved and Boeing (and formerly McDonnell Douglas) has had NG perform a large number of the sub-contracting work.


on another note, can everyone please look at what's been posted on this page before posting links? there's been several double posts of the same exact link.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom