Yes that would be relevant if both companies' current state of being were down to who took Navy or USAF contracts. Grumman thrived, for decades, on Navy work while also finding time to tackle other challenges like the LEM. The implication that only fools or the desperate should take Navy contracts is silly.
Or just power and thermal management around the flight envelope and mission legs.
Great, I was already heartbroken to know that YF-23 lost out in ATF, now we have a 4/5 chance of getting depressed with AF's choice and potentially killing the most beautiful bird in favor for the other.
It was a major misstep making this a classified program because the optics of retiring a large part of an already small air superiority force during one of the most intense periods of international relations since the end of the second world war is horrible.
If nobody is increasing funding for the USAF it really doesn't matter how much money is spend on Ukraine. The USAF has a limited budget to work with.
Somehow all of a sudden Augustine's Law #16 comes to mind...
https://aviationweek.com/defense-sp...ries-approach-may-live-usafs-autonomous-plans
Perhaps the point is to have overwhelming force, with deterrence being the objective. That, and the fact that the US likes to keep its options open. Not all allies will allow the US to fly particular missions from their bases.
There are certain attributes unique to human decision-making that cannot be replicated by mathematically-oriented algorithms and machines.
Like knowing that nosediving a plane into the ground to cause stack overflow in the register measuring force, is not the best way to land with minimal force on a simulator.
Hopefully they buy enough FA-XXs for more than a token deployment like they're doing with the F-35Cs right now. They used to have two squadrons of 12 Tomcats per carrier. 24 FA-XXs, 24 F-35Cs, 4-5 E-2Ds, a dozen MQ-25s, half a dozen Growlers, and 6 choppers brings you to 76 aircraft. The carriers are designed for 90 so just fill out the remainder with combat drones. (We all know this is pie in the sky but I can dream.)
I was wondering the same thing since NGAD is undoubtably expensive but only one can dream of such numbers just thought it was an interesting article even though it seems these numbers are not likely but I'm hoping for around 350-500 NGAD systems to come to fruition i wonder what the USAF NGAD numbers look like.
Interesting, but where is the US Navy going to get the funding for the 1000 fifth and sixth generation fighters from?
I was wondering the same thing since NGAD is undoubtably expensive but only one can dream of such numbers just thought it was an interesting article even though it seems these numbers are not likely but I'm hoping for around 350-500 NGAD systems to come to fruition i wonder what the USAF NGAD numbers look like.
Interesting, but where is the US Navy going to get the funding for the 1000 fifth and sixth generation fighters from?
Well then we'll have to make sure we're more competent at keeping others out of our network than we've been thus far.
The Network is simply a new battle space, the possibility of losing it is much less a peril then forfeiting it entirely.
So around 150 NGAD manned platforms and more unmanned modular platforms? either way I'm excited to see numbers finally.I was wondering the same thing since NGAD is undoubtably expensive but only one can dream of such numbers just thought it was an interesting article even though it seems these numbers are not likely but I'm hoping for around 350-500 NGAD systems to come to fruition i wonder what the USAF NGAD numbers look like.
Interesting, but where is the US Navy going to get the funding for the 1000 fifth and sixth generation fighters from?
The USAF NGAD numbers will probably be around the same as the US Navy’s, because both are going to be expensive programs. I cannot see the USAF ordering more than 600 NGADS.
That's the problem and I'm not liking even fewer fighters than the raptor. Its as if our leadership is trying to give up US airpower
Yeah, I'm concerned 150 manned NGAD components also have we also forgot that they mentioned 2 separate NGAD platforms for the Pacific and Europe? it's very concerning Considering if we repeat the Raptors history meaning in Numbers and Budget Cuts NGAD is too important not to get the reasonable numbers the USAF needs to maintain Air Superiority in the future but I'm a-bit confused about the two separate NGAD platforms for different theaters...I think it's going to be like fighterjocks comment there will be fewer NGAD Manned Aircraft. But maybe it's just a lot of smoke in the air.
This. Too much hand waving for me.
