USAF/USN 6th Gen Fighters - F/A-XX, F-X, NGAD, PCA, ASFS News & Analysis [2008- 2025]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Scott Kenny said:
Then why is it silvery/reflective (leading to assumptions about thermal conductivity) and only on the leading edges?
Click to expand...

It’s not only on the leading edges, it covers most of the aircraft.
 
I do not think there is a definitive answer for what the reflective coatings (seen on several aircraft types) do. It is suspected to be IR related as far as I’ve seen in open source.
 
Josh_TN said:
I do not think there is a definitive answer for what the reflective coatings (seen on several aircraft types) do. It is suspected to be IR related as far as I’ve seen in open source.
Click to expand...

There are some "media outlets" who have "reported" on the reflective coatings that do not conduct "reporting" or "journalism" as many of us know it. These organizations read forums - such as this one - or Instagram, etc. and create a story out of what *others* are reporting. They go no deeper than reporting what others have said or told them. A tiny scrap of information - like a photo - and then sensationalist speculation to meet a minimum word court and draw clicks. Secret. Shrouded in secrecy. Mysterious aircraft. Laser armor. Etc.

original.jpg

If you are looking to these sources for definitive answers you will be disappointed.

These media outlets - such as popular web sites - do little or no original research or investigation. They do not undercover new information. They do not verify or credit sources. They do not fact check.

On the other hand, there are those that are cagey, or who may answer questions with statements like

"I should not comment on that until potential litigation moves forward...."

Of course, if real, definitive answers were posted, those other media outlets would pick them up and create a story that gets clicks and is republished all over the world, without crediting the original source that worked very hard to obtain the answers. This forum is full of such individuals - experts, dedicated enthrusiasts, passionate airplane nerds who expend a great deal of time and effort to uncover facts. They are the apex predators of the secret projects world, Sharks in Lawnchairs. These media outlets are parasites that get fat off the work of others.

Let's make critical thinking great again!
 
images


Free drink on my tab!
 
Last edited:
The best information I can find potentially ties it to the Senior Spud program from the 90s, a would be IR coating to help manage absorbed energy from Radar sources. But who knows!
 
An interesting design dark sidius, no vertical tail fins, obviously points to the possible use of three dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles.
 
FighterJock said:
An interesting design dark sidius, no vertical tail fins, obviously points to the possible use of three dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles.
Click to expand...
Extract of the video.This one is the Skunk work video extract. What is it if this is not NGAD related ? Screenshot_1.png
 
Right now, one of the few things we do know about NGAD is that it's still considered sight-sensitive (otherwise we'd have actual photos). It's very unlikely that LM is leaking even cartoon images that are related to NGAD in any meaningful way.
 
My WAG it won’t be tailless it will be closer to that “Lady Liberty” design from awhile ago.
 

Attachments

  • 01ADC8B3-BFDD-4AD9-ABCB-B306071A30AE.jpeg
    01ADC8B3-BFDD-4AD9-ABCB-B306071A30AE.jpeg
    6.7 KB · Views: 108
  • DCC2B5A0-05A7-46E0-AE46-CD33AFFE6605.jpeg
    DCC2B5A0-05A7-46E0-AE46-CD33AFFE6605.jpeg
    10.1 KB · Views: 100
I do not think any renders are truly indicative of anything. The project has too much secrecy. That said, I would bet on broad band stealth being prioritized over maneuvering given an even money bet. But I would not be super confident of any aspect of NGAD given how little we know not just about any possible aircraft or demonstrators but also the requirements.
 
Josh_TN said:
I do not think any renders are truly indicative of anything. The project has too much secrecy. That said, I would bet on broad band stealth being prioritized over maneuvering given an even money bet. But I would not be super confident of any aspect of NGAD given how little we know not just about any possible aircraft or demonstrators but also the requirements.
Click to expand...
The only thing I'm reasonably confident about NGAD is that it will have longer range than even an F-22.

I'm guessing NGAD will have bays deep enough to hold 2000lb bombs (while F-22 does not have bays deep enough to hold anything bigger than a 500lb bomb). As an additional item to the deep bays, I'm guessing some kind of missile rack that would allow two-deep AMRAAMs or AIM260s when not carrying bombs.
 
Josh_TN said:
I do not think any renders are truly indicative of anything. The project has too much secrecy. That said, I would bet on broad band stealth being prioritized over maneuvering given an even money bet. But I would not be super confident of any aspect of NGAD given how little we know not just about any possible aircraft or demonstrators but also the requirements.
Click to expand...
The higly classified B-21 was the same , and the 2015 rendering was right
 
dark sidius said:
The higly classified B-21 was the same , and the 2015 rendering was right
Click to expand...

Some of the of the B-21 renderings (I do not remember which specific ones) were published by the USAF itself, which IMO is much more likely to be close to the real thing. Moreover in the case of a subsonic stealth bomber, there really is a particular optimal shape and not much else to be done - I'll be quite surprised if PAK-DA or Y-20 deviate from the general layout of B-21, even if the size and details like cockpit and intakes are different.
 
flateric said:
This is LM rendering.
Click to expand...
Anyone knows the time line between the v-tail design and the tailless design. I believe the v-tail predates the tailless one but not sure. Also reading somewhere that boeing was favored as lockheed initially pitched a more conservative design while boeing went for a much more radical one. Maybe that's why Lockheed went back and worked out their tailless flying wing design as well?
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm guessing NGAD will have bays deep enough to hold 2000lb bombs (while F-22 does not have bays deep enough to hold anything bigger than a 500lb bomb).
Click to expand...

The standard air-to-ground payloads for the F-22 are 1000-lb JDAMs or quad SDBs (which are roughly the external dimensions of a 2000lb bomb). The bays seem to be too short for 2000-lb JDAMs, not sure about depth.
 
TomS said:
The standard air-to-ground payloads for the F-22 are 1000-lb JDAMs or quad SDBs (which are roughly the external dimensions of a 2000lb bomb). The bays seem to be too short for 2000-lb JDAMs, not sure about depth.
Click to expand...
Probably depth more than length. A 2k JDAM is 3.89m, and the staggered AIM-120 loadout has about the same total length.
 
TomS said:
The standard air-to-ground payloads for the F-22 are 1000-lb JDAMs or quad SDBs (which are roughly the external dimensions of a 2000lb bomb). The bays seem to be too short for 2000-lb JDAMs, not sure about depth.
Click to expand...
Huh, didn't think that the 1000lb bombs would fit, they're quite wide/deep.

The quad JDAM rack is as wide and as long as a 2000lb bomb, but is not as deep.
 
donnage99 said:
Anyone knows the time line between the v-tail design and the tailless design. I believe the v-tail predates the tailless one but not sure.
Click to expand...
V-tail was the first concept published and appeared in LM 2012 calendar
 
flateric said:
V-tail was the first concept published and appeared in LM 2012 calendar
Click to expand...
Twelve years since now do you think this one will be the real NGAD Lockheed prospect ? After 2012 this is the tailless concept we see each time in promotion pictures..
 
Scott Kenny said:
Huh, didn't think that the 1000lb bombs would fit, they're quite wide/deep.

The quad JDAM rack is as wide and as long as a 2000lb bomb, but is not as deep.
Click to expand...

A GBU-32 (1000lb warhead) in the F-22 bay for illustration purpose.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240206_175925_Google.jpg
    Screenshot_20240206_175925_Google.jpg
    351.8 KB · Views: 330
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom