USAF/US NAVY 6G Fighter Programs - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA, ASFS news

the option possible is to rebuild all the fleet of F-22 but they have only 150 of it.....

If the US DoD goes that route then they need to rebuild ALL 187 surviving airframes and very seriously reconsider reestablishing and restarting the F-22 production line which would be rather expensive but as far as I know all of the production jigs and tooling are in a secure, controlled storage guarded by the US army.
 
If the US DoD goes that route then they need to rebuild ALL 187 surviving airframes and very seriously reconsider reestablishing and restarting the F-22 production line which would be rather expensive but as far as I know all of the production jigs and tooling are in a secure, controlled storage guarded by the US army.
The kinetics performance of the F-22 are very awesome so renovated all the fleet could be an option to awaiting the 6th gen fighter
 
I wonder what China was working on to counter NGAD? I also wonder if the change in approach for NGAD will impact the B-21's future?

It'll be interesting to see how programs are developed going forward as major powers move quicker to develop counters. Imagine consulting AI for the most appropriate counter to a specific threat and being able to aggressively mobilize resources in that direction before that threat manifests into a serious problem.
 
Not to open the thread to endless speculation but we went from debating one high ranking USAF civilian seemingly saying a prototype actually was flown to are we even going to build a true 6th generation fighter or do something else.

What happened?
 
Not to open the thread to endless speculation but we went from debating one high ranking USAF civilian seemingly saying a prototype actually was flown to are we even going to build a true 6th generation fighter or do something else.

What happened?

I think several decades of abortive defense programs have conditioned us to fear the worst when anyone with any role in the decision making on these projects says anything less than effusive about the state of procurement.

Not that there’s nothing to be concerned about. We knew going in that NGAD was going to be extremely expensive, and with post-Covid… everything… Congress’s appetite for the highest of high end hardware might not be what it once was. But I think the possible scenario of “the Air Force is pumping the breaks to reassess the exact plane that they want before committing to it, and possibly firing a shot across the bow of some ossified and complacent defense contractors,” is being automatically put aside in favor of, “we’re at threat level midnight, people, this is an A-12-level omnishambles.” And I get the impulse, but since we haven’t even seen any officially acknowledged material about what has flown, what they think the final product will look like, or even what the operational requirements are, I think we’re getting out over our skis.
 
What a Schill. Can that guy even comprehend the amount of compute in a cell phone? This is day one of the future and it only gets more Terminator from here.
He is right the drones are not the Alpha and Omega of the battles , look at the Ukraine war , drone battle and nothing move , nobody win its like the world war 1 battles , I shot , you shot ..... and soon with direct energy weapon it will be end of the little drone, and it will be a good thing.
 
The USAF would be absolutely nuts if they stop the NGAD program, instead they should continue no matter what and order a 50/50 split mix between manned and unmanned.
 
Saddly behind paywall instead of contract we will see a cut in NGAD , the option possible is to rebuild all the fleet of F-22 but they have only 150 of it.....
If the US DoD goes that route then they need to rebuild ALL 187 surviving airframes and very seriously reconsider reestablishing and restarting the F-22 production line which would be rather expensive but as far as I know all of the production jigs and tooling are in a secure, controlled storage guarded by the US army.
An extensive MLU and SLEP programme? Makes sense. Reestablish the production line? Hell no.

The problem is F-22 is not suited for current West Pacific theatre of operations. It lacks operational range, simple as. In conflict situations it would require forward basing at Korea and Japan, but the problem is, Japan lacks HAS, not only JASDF bases hut even USFJ bases as well, that including Kadena. If there is to be a high intensity conflict with China within a year or two, severe on-ground attrition of these fighters in Japan is near garaunteed.

They could desperse and operate from bases further away from Chinese mainland but this puts strain on the tanker fleet.

Also, restarting the production would reauire an entirely new production plant. FW is already full capacity, and other LM plants are all up to something. This would meam infrastructure investment that would pressure the service into selecting LM for follow-up 6th gen programme, jeopardising a big part of bargaining power.
 
The way I see it is the F-22 is old technology now and is in need of replacement even designing a so called F-22M modified with some sixth generation technology in a fifth generation plus aircraft would not work in the modern battlefield if that is the way that the USAF are currently thinking then that will be plane (pun intended) stupid. :mad:
 
The way I see it is the F-22 is old technology now and is in need of replacement even designing a so called F-22M modified with some sixth generation technology in a fifth generation plus aircraft would not work in the modern battlefield if that is the way that the USAF are currently thinking then that will be plane (pun intended) stupid. :mad:
Surely you could build it with F-35 technology and a modular avionics architecture, maybe try squeeze a bit more fuel in and slightly larger bays, F-22EX and plenty.
 
Don't get me wrong I like the basic idea Forest Green, but it just would not be the same as a new technology fighter as the F-22 was back in the 1980s when it was the ATF.
 
It could all just be the USAF taking in the data from the prototypes and refining their requirements based on what is and isn't doable. New airframes aren't exactly expensive and the F-35 already took the brunt of the cost of the avionics.
 
The way I see it is the F-22 is old technology now and is in need of replacement even designing a so called F-22M modified with some sixth generation technology in a fifth generation plus aircraft would not work in the modern battlefield if that is the way that the USAF are currently thinking then that will be plane (pun intended) stupid. :mad:
What "pisses" me the most, is they already flown one or two 6th generation fighter prototypes, which already costs alot of money to the tax payers, and now they want to f**k everything by scraping the all program, this is just nuts:(
 
What "pisses" me the most, is they already flown one or two 6th generation fighter prototypes, which already costs alot of money to the tax payers, and now they want to f**k everything by scraping the all program, this is just nuts:(
Yes I think the same, Guys you have it in the hands and you don't know if you want it ? You fly 6th gen prototypes and now you want anything else ? USAF Generals look like they don't know themself what they need and what they wants it is suspicious... Put pressure on Lockheed about there F-35 to be in budget instead.. I regret realy Will Roper for me it was the better in his job.
 
Do we know they were prototypes? I thought it was possible that the flown hardware in question might have been tech demonstrators. There’s a wide gulf between “here’s proof this new subsystem won’t make our plane fall out of the sky,” and, “this bird’s ready for squadron service.” Even the throwaway comment (was it from Kendall?) about records being set might not have been about an aircraft that was close to even the prototype stage, much less closer to service.
 
I think not buyin into the hypes from contractors shows maturity from air force. Remember how much the ATF supposedly cost in both per unit and maintenance?

With that being said, sometimes combat doctrine matures after the platform is put into service not before. You realize how the capabilities the platform have can be optimized in a whole new different way. That was the case with F-22. Remember air force couldn't accept a war of tomorrow where 4th gen fighters operate in contested airspace? Now missile truck f-15EX working alongside f-35 with a whole array of different RCS profiles on enemy's radar is all the rage. Combat doctrines will evolve with capabilities and limitations of your platforms.

Air Force may need to consider not ONLY how the current NGAD would fullfill missions in China Sea and think "is the alternative of not having one at all acceptable" and just go with whatever feasible technologies you can fit in the thing. Then have the war planners work with what they have that may not be technology focused. Let just say NGAD currently is too short-legged, how about working on artificial islands or negociating another base with one of the southeast asian countries, etc. rather than going back to the drawing board, or scrapping it all together.
 
I think not buyin into the hypes from contractors shows maturity from air force. Remember how much the ATF supposedly cost in both per unit and maintenance?

With that being said, sometimes combat doctrine matures after the platform is put into service not before. You realize how the capabilities the platform have can be optimized in a whole new different way. That was the case with F-22. Remember air force couldn't accept a war of tomorrow where 4th gen fighters operate in contested airspace? Now missile truck f-15EX working alongside f-35 with a whole array of different RCS profiles on enemy's radar is all the rage. Combat doctrines will evolve with capabilities and limitations of your platforms.

Air Force may need to consider not ONLY how the current NGAD would fullfill missions in China Sea and think "is the alternative of not having one at all acceptable" and just go with whatever feasible technologies you can fit in the thing. Then have the war planners work with what they have that may not be technology focused. Let just say NGAD currently is too short-legged, how about working on artificial islands or negociating another base with one of the southeast asian countries, etc. rather than going back to the drawing board, or scrapping it all together.
F-15 EX and F-35 are short legged too, one have great kinematics with a design of years 70s and not stealth and the other will never have his full capacity with medium kinematics capacity and stealth , do you realy thing this combo is the air dominance of decades to come ? China are working on J-20, 6th gen fighter , capacity in space and a lot in the Hypersonic and may be the SR-72 will be Chinese instead of US. Boeing invest 1 billion in a new facility and you imagine USAF say I don(t want new aircraft, what will be the credibility for the futur ?
 
The F-35A/C have a ~37% internal fuel fraction.


Boeing is in good position on NGAD , Lockheed is too much in difficulty on the F-35 and the F-15EX program of record is a succeed. Sad that Northrop don't want to come in the game
 
Last edited:
F-15 EX and F-35 are short legged too, one have great kinematics with a design of years 70s and not stealth and the other will never have his full capacity with medium kinematics capacity and stealth , do you realy thing this combo is the air dominance of decades to come ? China are working on J-20, 6th gen fighter , capacity in space and a lot in the Hypersonic and may be the SR-72 will be Chinese instead of US. Boeing invest 1 billion in a new facility and you imagine USAF say I don(t want new aircraft, what will be the credibility for the futur ?
Please re-read. You missed my point entirely.
 
Last edited:
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom