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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dollar bills are useless at air combat and SEAD. According to this China already has 200 J-20s in service, so more than the number of F-22s at present.
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M8qFbKTo4do
Half a year ago we were already estimating between 280-300 aircraft to be in service. Last year they produced around 70-80 aircraft and this year they'll most likely produce close to 100 by the end and this is not even the most optimistic estimate we have.

Edit: Also, that clickbait video is pure trash and a waste of time, I personally wouldn't consume any media that trashes one thing and then goes on to praise something else without providing substantial proof first.
 
Last edited:
We need a YouTube moratorium, as they did for nukes in the 1960's. Too much clickbait bullshit videos over the last two days.
That wouldn't be enough. Look at the sort of articles on defense matters that get to the top of the unholy algorithms used by Google, MSN, and everyone else these days. Anytime I read something from "The National Interest" it's just insulting to whatever brain cells I have left.
 
Half a year ago we were already estimating between 280-300 aircraft to be in service. Last year they produced around 70-80 aircraft and this year they'll most likely produce close to 100 by the end and this is not even the most optimistic estimate we have.

Edit: Also, that clickbait video is pure trash and a waste of time, I personally wouldn't consume any media that trashes one thing and then goes on to praise something else without providing substantial proof first.
I think USAF know that.
 
Dollar bills are useless at air combat and SEAD. According to this China already has 200 J-20s in service, so more than the number of F-22s at present.
That's if that budget isn't spent on something else. In reality, in time the USAF proposes the re-opening of the F-22 production line, plan for it, get congressional approval, design an update programme to reinstate the aircraft systems back to state-of-the-art level, actually produce it and field it, they'll be able to design, manufacture and field a much more crucial and helpful warfighting capability in the Pacific in near term with that exact budget saved by not restarting the F-22 production.

That is also the exact reason the USAF isn't even mentioning a single hint about doing so either. I don't know why you are so pressed about the F-22 but sorry, it really isn't it.

If NGAD is further delayed, it would be much more helpful to increase budget for F-35 block 4 and make LM and NG hire more engineers to fix that damn programme first, start preparing for block 5 already, and resurrect AETP, rather than restarting the F-22 production because updating the F-22 avionics/mission systems to current standards would be a whole new level of difficult task even compared to the block 4.
 
I think that DARPA has been going a lot further in their 'spectrum warfare' and 'hyperspectral imaging' research than they've let on. I'm seeing the term percolating throughout the services and there are hints that DARPA is developing some truly game-changing spectrum warfare ideas.

https://defensescoop.com/2024/07/02/marine-corps-mq-9-drones-stealthy-secretive-pods-eric-smith/
https://nanografi.com/blog/nanotechnology-and-nanomaterials-for-camouflage-and-stealth-applications/
https://www.specim.com/technology/what-is-hyperspectral-imaging/
 
The AAF construct is already being leveraged on T-7, MQ-9B, and an additional program and is executable and compliant within the current DAFI 62-601 and new DAFI 63- 101/20-101.

Hmmmm....
 
On a lighter note, some goodies from today's Boeing haul. I see the three stream boundary injection in the exhaust nozzle. The "flat" area. Enjoy!
 

Attachments

  • US20190323453A1-20191024-D00001.png
    US20190323453A1-20191024-D00001.png
    106.6 KB · Views: 87
  • US20190323453A1-20191024-D00005.png
    US20190323453A1-20191024-D00005.png
    152.1 KB · Views: 90
  • US20190323453A1-20191024-D00004 (1).png
    US20190323453A1-20191024-D00004 (1).png
    286.9 KB · Views: 85
  • US10030605-20180724-D00019.png
    US10030605-20180724-D00019.png
    59.4 KB · Views: 74
  • US10030605-20180724-D00015.png
    US10030605-20180724-D00015.png
    19.3 KB · Views: 75
  • US10030605-20180724-D00011.png
    US10030605-20180724-D00011.png
    47 KB · Views: 85
IDK, it is already known or not.
I found FA-XX 3d printed model in San Diego Air Space Museum's Boeing special exhibition

And we could find possible weapon bay layout

View attachment 736301
View attachment 736302
Wouldn't be too controversial to assume it's Su57 style with 2 centerline bays further towards the aft, in addition to f22/j20 style auxiliary bays (2) for short ranged missiles.

Also, that print looks like using a resin-printed color system, so it came out of the printer with camo and panels 'painted' on. Cool beans!
 
Defense and Aerospace Report

Steve Trimble was on this week and discuss the issues with NGAD and CCAs. I thought it was interesting that he mentioned that LM and NG simulations indicated that CCAs would be shot down before they could deliver their effects. I don't think they got shot down after the fifth, sixth, or tenth mission. I think they mean the first? You not only lose the CCA but you also lose whatever munitions they are carrying. The primes are arguing for more robust CCAs in terms of survivability. You could argue that the larger primes have an interest in the AF continuing buying more exquisite manned systems or at least more expensive CCAs. But that scoop should give the AF pause.

The AF hasn't even figured out an operational concept for CCAs yet. How do short ranged CCAs operate with a manned component with longer range? Will it be runway independent or just able to operation from austere runways? Can you support them them logistically within the First Island Chain? Is that a bigger footprint or smaller footprint vs manned aircraft? What's the ROI? If they are a third of the cost of an F-35 it may be a better value to buy more F-35s, especially if you can re engine them with an adaptive cycle engine? You can carry the same amount of AMRAAM classed weapons, but you also get more robust sensors and more versatility. CCA advocates will argue about the higher sustainment cost. But if China can deploy enough 4th and 5th gen manned fighters against our swarm attack we may end up with result similar to Iran's attack against Israel a few months ago. In Ukraine, low cost drones are more of a nuisance than a game changer. The AF is taking a pause on NGAD to make sure what they are doing is correct. May be they should take a pause instead of CCAs, but it really looks like they have fallen in love with a vision without the details really thought out.
 
[,,,] But if China can deploy enough 4th and 5th gen manned fighters against our swarm attack we may end up with result similar to Iran's attack against Israel a few months ago.

I think you are right. There is a risk. Statistically, China would be better positioned to replicate the mass shootdown of drones with their large contingent of non-stealth fighters. Reality could be radically different, however, with CCA operating while a large 5th or 6th Gen manned fleet is achieving local Air Dominance..
Imagine if Iran had F-22 that day, roaming the skies over Jordan. The efficiency of the intercepting force would have been greatly altered, to the point that DCA and survival would have been their priority.
 
Last edited:
I think you are right. There is a risk. Statistically, China would be better positioned to replicate the mass shootdown of drones with their large contingent of non-stealth fighters. Reality could be radically different, however, with CCA operating while a large 5th or 6th Gen manned fleet is achieving local Air Dominance..
Imagine if Iran had F-22 that day, roaming the skies over Jordan. The efficiency of the intercepting force would have been greatly altered, to the point that DCA and survival would have been their priority.
I also wonder if comms will be a single point of failure with CCAs. Can CCAs perform as well in a comms degraded environment than a manned fighter? I have no idea.
 
I also wonder if comms will be a single point of failure with CCAs. Can CCAs perform as well in a comms degraded environment than a manned fighter? I have no idea.
As I understand the CONOPS for CCAs, they're flying almost completely autonomously. The only thing the USAF/USN wants the flight crews in the manned planes to do is tell the CCAs "weapons tight/weapons free" and what formations to use in any dogfights. Basically the CCAs need to have about as much pilot interaction as a JDAM. "Go here, blow something up"

It's actually the NDAG/FAXX that would be hurting in a comms degraded environment, since they wouldn't have as much sensor data coming in from the CCAs.
 
I thought I'd post this video from Millennium 7* about why stealth technology may have diminishing returns due to advances in sensor technology:


If this is not the proper thread then please tell which thread is and I'll repost it there after deleting this one.
 
I thought I'd post this video from Millennium 7* about why stealth technology may have diminishing returns due to advances in sensor technology:


If this is not the proper thread then please tell which thread is and I'll repost it there after deleting this one.
The arguments sound awfully similar to the ones I heard years ago. It looks like he took statements from a SAAB representative at face value in addition to fundamentally misunderstanding the entire of point of stealth.
 
The arguments sound awfully similar to the ones I heard years ago. It looks like he took statements from a SAAB representative at face value in addition to fundamentally misunderstanding the entire of point of stealth.
One might be inclined to wonder what a Lockheed Martin spokesperson might have to say in such an interview
 
I thought I'd post this video from Millennium 7* about why stealth technology may have diminishing returns due to advances in sensor technology:


If this is not the proper thread then please tell which thread is and I'll repost it there after deleting this one.
A non-VLO fighter, all else being equal, will almost always lose a BVR engagement with a VLO fighter, with modern radar technology having added the almost. I don't think the clickbait headline should be taken at face value, and I don't think real military planners are obsessing over min-maxing a single tech tree. Rather, the goal has always been to maximize combat capabilities. Stealth, like radar, is just a technology that adds capability to a platform. Some platforms (like ground attack/ BVR) will benefit from it, others (interception/ dogfighting) will require only minimal stealth geometry to avoid return amplification. I personally think the trend of networked systems is more pivotal to newer fighters and will require a look at the IT industry to understand how to leverage its advantages, with things like dispersed mesh networks, real-time data transfer, and EW cybersecurity.
 
In late June Millennium 7* put out a video about the latest difficulties with the NGAD programme:


The USAF NGAD program is facing unexpected difficulties.Are the NGAD, and the FA-XX, going to happen?

Well I hope the NGAD programme goes through however what I really want to see right now a photographs of the NGAD demonstrator aircraft.
 
There is another option... There's a 5.5 Gen fighter being designed specifically for the Pacific theater and closer to production. The GCAP Tempest. Is it as good as NGAD? Probably not, but have Boeing jump in and license build a US version with the F-35 kit. Gets you numbers and is better than F-22/35/15EX, as an interim design while NGAD gets worked out.
 
In late June Millennium 7* put out a video about the latest difficulties with the NGAD programme:




Well I hope the NGAD programme goes through however what I really want to see right now a photographs of the NGAD demonstrator aircraft.

Don't believe every random YouTube video you see.
When you view such videos,you should ask yourself "Is this BS or not?" and "What were the sources for this information?"
 
Don't believe every random YouTube video you see.
When you view such videos,you should ask yourself "Is this BS or not?" and "What were the sources for this information?"

I have not had any reason to regard this particular YT video poster with any doubt as he seems to be well researched and knows what he talks about, I wouldn't have posted this video in this thread if I had doubts about its veracity.
 
Don't believe every random YouTube video you see.
When you view such videos,you should ask yourself "Is this BS or not?" and "What were the sources for this information?"

Right. However, it seems this guy does good research and he also mentions when he is just guessing. (Btw, I do not know him personally.)
 
As I understand the CONOPS for CCAs, they're flying almost completely autonomously. The only thing the USAF/USN wants the flight crews in the manned planes to do is tell the CCAs "weapons tight/weapons free" and what formations to use in any dogfights. Basically the CCAs need to have about as much pilot interaction as a JDAM. "Go here, blow something up"

It's actually the NDAG/FAXX that would be hurting in a comms degraded environment, since they wouldn't have as much sensor data coming in from the CCAs.
In a comms degraded environment it may be like shooting fish in a barrel. I think that's what LM and NG are trying to tell us. CCAs will have limited sensors and be dependent on off board sensors like from NGAD and other manned and unmanned platforms. NGAD and 5th Gen fighters have more a capability to autonomously than CCAs.
 
There is another option... There's a 5.5 Gen fighter being designed specifically for the Pacific theater and closer to production. The GCAP Tempest. Is it as good as NGAD? Probably not, but have Boeing jump in and license build a US version with the F-35 kit. Gets you numbers and is better than F-22/35/15EX, as an interim design while NGAD gets worked out.

What do you mean the F35 kit???
 
https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/episode-196-ngad/

Good high level discussion of the issues surrounding the NGAD platform pause. I am not sure whether the excuse that they are pausing because of some unexplained PLA advancement is valid, but if it is, I think having an engineer running the Air Force is a bad thing. Engineer often want the perfect design and want to tweak and add things along the way. That is where the Navy ran afoul on the new Constellation Class. Warfighters want an 80% solution to deal with the current threat and would prefer to iterate over time like the AF did with the F-16. By the time we figure out how to refocus NGAD to deal with whatever the Chinese have developed, they will have something else that will prompt another pause in a few years. More concerning...have the Chinese got inside of our decision cycle? Are we in reactive mode to maintain air superiority?

CCAs risks being a panacea. We have ample evidence showing the value of manned 4th and 5th gen fighters. The only evidence we have on the value of CCAs are simulations and marketing by unmanned aircraft primes and military leaders. Until proven otherwise, CCAs should be viewed as force enablers for the manned component.
 
In a comms degraded environment it may be like shooting fish in a barrel. I think that's what LM and NG are trying to tell us. CCAs will have limited sensors and be dependent on off board sensors like from NGAD and other manned and unmanned platforms. NGAD and 5th Gen fighters have more a capability to autonomously than CCAs.
Yes, that's certainly a risk.
 
Seems they do indeed have embraced the new paradigm and are preparing to go Cactus:

“As an Air Force, we are learning that we are all going to be on the front lines,” said Maj. Gen. Christopher Niemi, U.S. Air Force Warfare Center commander. “The USAF no longer has the luxury of projecting power from sanctuary bases. Airmen will be required to sustain the same operational tempo as before, but under the threat of large-scale enemy fires at a magnitude this nation has never seen. Unlike Red Flag, which only exposes operators to enemy tactics, techniques and procedures, Bamboo Eagle exposes the entire blue kill chain to enemy threats, from the logistics airman loading pallets on a C-130 to the F-22 pilot engaging the enemy.”
A piece of the Air Force’s reoptimization efforts includes reorienting Air Combat Command. Bamboo Eagle is an example of what this reorientation looks like. By synchronizing this large-scale exercise in concert with Joint Force elements, ACC aims to increase the Air Force’s competitiveness for Great Power Competition.

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Dis...concludes-second-iteration-of-major-exercise/
Would the circumnavigating Global Air superiority fighter be back in its devil box?
 
Last edited:
No surprises there for anyone playing at home, the basing situation is untenable. World's greatest air defense power with secure GLOCs, massive cold war stockpiles and a full wartime economy for 1.5 years is currently getting dunked on by drip fed 90s overmatch TBMs and Europe's poorest country's trashfire. The money is much better spent to turn SCS into a ghoulish automated hellscape from standoff and give TSMC a Parthian shot should things go sour.
 
https://insidedefense.com/daily-new...hters-joint-assets-and-international-partners
Air Force official: CCAs to team with 'all fighters,' 'joint assets' and 'international partners'

The Air Force's Collaborative Combat Aircraft will not only pair with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the Next Generation Air Dominance platform , but also the F-15EX Eagle II, F-22 Raptor and platforms from other services or allies, according to a top Air Force official. “We’re in lockstep with the Navy to collaborate, looking at specific areas that allow us to move forward together,”…
 
Last edited:
No surprises there for anyone playing at home, the basing situation is untenable. World's greatest air defense power with secure GLOCs, massive cold war stockpiles and a full wartime economy for 1.5 years is currently getting dunked on by drip fed 90s overmatch TBMs and Europe's poorest country's trashfire. The money is much better spent to turn SCS into a ghoulish automated hellscape from standoff and give TSMC a Parthian shot should things go sour.
If the concern is that USAF tactical air in general won't have the range for the South China Sea after the nearest airbases get targeted with a few hundred ballistic and cruise missiles, what are the sort of unmanned assets that could possibly turn it into a hellscape? The UAVs will need to operate from somewhere.
 
If the concern is that USAF tactical air in general won't have the range for the South China Sea after the nearest airbases get targeted with a few hundred ballistic and cruise missiles, what are the sort of unmanned assets that could possibly turn it into a hellscape? The UAVs will need to operate from somewhere.
Q58 Valkyries can be launched off a truck/trailer.
 
That's pretty much a one-way approach, unless they can equip them with a robust and reusable rough landing system such as airbags (which, along with operational issues such as long-term maintenance and spares, would likely eat into available payload).
 
That's pretty much a one-way approach, unless they can equip them with a robust and reusable rough landing system such as airbags (which, along with operational issues such as long-term maintenance and spares, would likely eat into available payload).
This kind of aircraft have nothing to be an air dominance unmanned fighter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom