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

Status
Not open for further replies.
NMaude said:
A thought just occurred to me, with the new incoming Fanta Fascist administration I wonder if they will be crazy enough to go "Screw it, let's restart production of the F-22"?
Click to expand...
All of the F-22 tooling is gone, there are time periods the Govt establishes for how long the prime stores and maintains the tooling after production ends. The USAF and USN really need to nail down their requirements for NGAD and F/A-XX and STREAMLINE the programs. Example: My current company, we were quoting subsystem components for the V280 and the amount of SDRLs was astounding to what was flowed from the Army down to Bell plus I am amazed the Army actually selected a platform and put a prime under contract since we know the Amy does not have a very good track record. 75% of the cost was bureaucracy, duplicated requirements and general non-meat fillers.

We (the US) apparently developed, built and flown an NGAD demonstrator within a 12-month period (I think there were 3 platforms, one from each prime but I could be wrong) and it seemed to validate some new tech and performance. I am also sure our intelligence agencies are working overtime regarding the two new Chinese aircraft including their new naval ships as well. The US has to re-think our procurement system for new hardware and systems, we use to be able to build excellent aircraft but that was many decades ago.
 
Rhinocrates said:
It's not the same case as the F-15, which is a much simpler plane and built in much greater numbers for much longer. The tooling no longer exists and many subcontractors may have gone out of business or be unable to provide new parts. The chips and software would also be waaay out of date and out of production.
Click to expand...
Taking that a step further the F-15E was still in production and the Saudi's had invested literally billions of dollars into modernization of the platform.
 
Might this set-back help the cause of a B-1R missile truck controlling loyal wingmen?

The missile truck flies above the ocean and controls them from below.
 
I still remember that 100 f-15E are going to stay, as judged by the nbr of EPAWSS kit attributed to the fleet (a number that is deemed to be slightly increased as we heard recently).
 
publiusr said:
Might this set-back help the cause of a B-1R missile truck controlling loyal wingmen?

The missile truck flies above the ocean and controls them from below.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not; even if such a platform had any viability (and it does not) the fleet is falling apart.

Everyone needs to get over the fact that once you stop building an aircraft, you cannot cost effectively build it again nor can you prolong its life indefinitely no matter how much you spend. Some aircraft like B-52 have uniquely high tolerances for high hours, but that is hardly normal.
 
TomcatViP said:
I still remember that 100 f-15E are going to stay, as judged by the nbr of EPAWSS kit attributed to the fleet (a number that is deemed to be slightly increased as we heard recently).
Click to expand...

I believe the newest/most modernized airframes remain.
 
Rhinocrates said:
The tooling no longer exists
Click to expand...

As far as I know the F-22 production tooling is in secure, controlled storage per congressional mandate.

Rhinocrates said:
many subcontractors may have gone out of business or be unable to provide new parts.
Click to expand...

Good points.

The reason I mentioned this idea is that the president-elect is NOT known for his intelligence plus his proposed cabinet is full of grossly unqualified people who have no business being in the government so I wouldn't put it past them to come up with such a hare-brained idea.
 
Josh_TN said:
Congress is the organization that would have to do that. And quite honestly that seems unlikely.
Click to expand...
Only if the US is the one starting WW3.

There's a couple countries that seem to be dancing on the edge of "launch the nukes" that may attack the US first. Or attack countries that the US is obligated by treaty to go to war to defend.



publiusr said:
Might this set-back help the cause of a B-1R missile truck controlling loyal wingmen?
Click to expand...
No.

B-1 fleet is out of fatigue life. All that loafing around at minimum sweep over Afghanistan wrecked the wings (and wing boxes, IIRC).


Josh_TN said:
Some aircraft like B-52 have uniquely high tolerances for high hours, but that is hardly normal.
Click to expand...
Helps that the B-52 was initially designed for an 80,000 hour airframe life.

That is not a typo, I mean eighty thousand hours. That is ten times the designed lifespan of F-15 or F-16, five times the designed lifespan of a Strike Eagle. Then in the 1960s and early 1970s, the BUFFs had to fly down in the weeds for their penetration missions, and that took a LOT of life out of them. USAF estimated that the fatigue lifespan is now down to about 37,000 hours, but at ~350 hours a year that puts the B-52 retirement into the 2060s. Where the currently serving BUFF airframes will be 100 years old!
 
aim9xray said:
Do you have a citation for that factoid? I'd like to learn more.
Click to expand...
Came out of the same report that said they have 37khours remaining, when the upper wing skins will wear out and not be economical to replace. Titled "B-52 service life extension" or something like that, should be in the B-52J thread.
 
quellish said:
In this case of course "right sizing" the A-10 force means "zero sizing". The Air Force wants them gone by I believe 2027.

ACC has been vocal that they need 60 squadrons of aircraft (currently 57). Big Air Force has responded with "We can even better than that! How about 50?" Math has not been a core competency at the Air Force in a long time. They want to get to 50 or less by removing the 7 A-10 squadrons, which Congress has a number of valid issues with.

The Air Force wants to have a smaller fighter force (less than 50 squadrons) comprised of:
F-35
F-22
F-15EX ("replacing" F-15C, also replacing F-15E)
F-16
+ NGAD (eventually replacing F-22)

With a large portion of that being the F-16.
F-15EX production is limited to 24 a year (36 if Boeing gets a $40m handout to hire more managers), with a total buy of 104 (not the original 144, and USAF calls 104 an "increase").
Click to expand...

I don't think that 104 F-15EX number will stand with this incoming administration unless the AF ups the number of F-35A's in its annual buys. My feeling is that we'll see a uptick in both given the stated position of incoming SecDef for buying 72 fighters a year and the fact that LM is in no place right now to deliver that many F-35A's to the USAF each year without a ramp. So a 48-24 or 60-12 F-35/F-15 split can be expected in FY26 and 27 which would restore some or most of those missing 40 F-15 EX's. The wildcard would be if the incoming administration starts counting CCA buys as 'fighter buys' in its future budgets but as far as I can tell most of those buys are still in RDT&E accounts for the next few years.
 
Hegseth did great at his hearing and put those idiots in their place. With his background, he should be a very good, common sense SECDEF to get our military back on track, we don't need a retired general, admiral or CEO. NGAD needs a good common sense approach among other programs.
 
Yeah we don't need someone with experience, expertise, understanding of programmatic issues, leadership experience, or any of that other crap. We need an unqualified talking head with a history of alcoholism who says "warfighter" and "warrior" a bunch. That will definitely fix procurement.
 
I don't think if I've been impressed by the work of any Defense Secretary in my lifetime but perhaps someone with more of an infantryman's perspective will be a good thing, perhaps not. Time will tell. I'm a bit more concerned with someone with the President's ear like Elon Musk talking far outside of his area of expertise to give bad ideas on national security matters (or anything really).
 
Hydroman said:
Hegseth did great at his hearing and put those idiots in their place. With his background, he should be a very good, common sense SECDEF to get our military back on track, we don't need a retired general, admiral or CEO. NGAD needs a good common sense approach among other programs.
Click to expand...
Sure May be better than somebody like Kendall.
 
Moose said:
Yeah we don't need someone with experience, expertise, understanding of programmatic issues, leadership experience, or any of that other crap. We need an unqualified talking head with a history of alcoholism who says "warfighter" and "warrior" a bunch. That will definitely fix procurement.
Click to expand...
Yeah, like we need another Dick Cheney, Lloyd Austin and Les Aspin types. Les Aspin was one of the main characters which screwed the B-2 over hence only 21 aircraft. We don't need anymore narcissists and conveying look at me, place me on a pedestal because I have a high-level govt position types, gimme a break.
 
Hydroman said:
Yeah, like we need another Dick Cheney, Lloyd Austin and Les Aspin types. Les Aspin was one of the main characters which screwed the B-2 over hence only 21 aircraft. We don't need anymore narcissists and conveying look at me, place me on a pedestal because I have a high-level govt position types, gimme a break.
Click to expand...
You mean you don't want another Four-star who immediately went to sit on the board for Raytheon to collect millions to then be in charge of procurement? Pretty sure RTX money is a requirement to be considered for SecDef!
 
Hydroman said:
Hegseth did great at his hearing and put those idiots in their place. With his background, he should be a very good, common sense SECDEF to get our military back on track, we don't need a retired general, admiral or CEO. NGAD needs a good common sense approach among other programs.
Click to expand...
We'll agree to disagree then. The guy seems like a flaming idiot to me. Now, back on topic.

One of the problems they're having with NGAD is who owns it. I don't know if that's been resolved. We know that's one of the reasons NG dropped out. I also understand that the government let LM have too much control over the F-35. But it seems their backlash has been a bit overboard, in that regard. Does anyone know if the ownership issue has been resolved?
 
Colonial-Marine said:
I don't think if I've been impressed by the work of any Defense Secretary in my lifetime but perhaps someone with more of an infantryman's perspective will be a good thing, perhaps not. Time will tell. I'm a bit more concerned with someone with the President's ear like Elon Musk talking far outside of his area of expertise to give bad ideas on national security matters (or anything really).
Click to expand...
(Musk, after taking a giant dose of ketamine)

“What of we equipped all the guns with AI that shouted ‘Le Epic Bacon’ every time a soldier pulled the trigger?”
 
Moose said:
Yeah we don't need someone with experience, expertise, understanding of programmatic issues, leadership experience, or any of that other crap. We need an unqualified talking head with a history of alcoholism who says "warfighter" and "warrior" a bunch. That will definitely fix procurement.
Click to expand...

#OnlyTheBestPeople :rolleyes:
 
Still nothing in news about NGAD with the new administration coming....?. It is not like there is a J-36 starting flying....
 
FlyGuy369 said:
I have every channel and media source covered, most traffic is exclusively speculation and fandom.
Click to expand...
Yes nobody speak clear , nowhere about this program.... There is a hurry but it is like everybody don't care about the Technology advance of China. Dangerous game in 5 years it will be too late, the flight of the J-36/J-50 was not a joke.
 
dark sidius said:
Yes nobody speak clear , nowhere about this program.... There is a hurry but it is like everybody don't care about the Technology advance of China. Dangerous game in 5 years it will be too late, the flight of the J-36/J-50 was not a joke.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're going to see a day one decisions, and it's day minus-01. So much angst!
 
Ozair said:
I doubt you will see a day 10 decision...
Click to expand...
I would not expect one, no. I'm sure they've gotten transitional briefings, but there are a lot of topics to chew over before deciding on a path forward.
 
_Del_ said:
I would not expect one, no. I'm sure they've gotten transitional briefings, but there are a lot of topics to chew over before deciding on a path forward.
Click to expand...
Especially when they don't even have a USAF Secretary. I could easily see this decision waiting on that nominee being in place and a couple of weeks after his feet have been behind the desk.
 
IMO it seemed like Kendall at least was leaning towards NGAD being F-22 successor as well as F-35 replacement too. Last September he said he wanted NGAD unit cost to be similar to F-35 or F-15EX, and recently he said one of the options for NGAD is something that looks like an F-35 follow on as a more affordable multirole aircraft.

So if NGAD rescope does become a more affordable multirole aircraft and enters service in late 2030s or early 2040s, I think it's possible that F-35 production will end and NGAD will take over. With first LRIP F-35 delivered in 2011 and designed for about 8,000 hour or about 30 year lifespan, the timing would work out too. Of course all this depends on what direction the new administration wants to take NGAD, hopefully know some time this year.
 
RadicalDisconnect said:
IMO it seemed like Kendall at least was leaning towards NGAD being F-22 successor as well as F-35 replacement too. Last September he said he wanted NGAD unit cost to be similar to F-35 or F-15EX, and recently he said one of the options for NGAD is something that looks like an F-35 follow on as a more affordable multirole aircraft.
Click to expand...
It is certainly a viable option but not a fast one.
RadicalDisconnect said:
So if NGAD rescope does become a more affordable multirole aircraft and enters service in late 2030s or early 2040s, I think it's possible that F-35 production will end and NGAD will take over. With first LRIP F-35 delivered in 2011 and designed for about 8,000 hour or about 30 year lifespan, the timing would work out too. Of course all this depends on what direction the new administration wants to take NGAD, hopefully know some time this year.
Click to expand...
F-35 is notionally in production to 2049 but I don't think anyone expects the USAF to be buying them then. In that context it makes a lot of sense to transition to another platform around that time. I think the problem remains though that according to Kendall manned NGAD is too expensive, he thinks another 20 billion, and an F-35 successor is going to be that and more, as well as NGAS and CCA and likely a new airlifter soon and Sentinel and who knows what else.

So it potentially becomes more a question of money... I've seen suggestions that the USAF would buy F/A-XX as an F-35 replacement and save themselves some dev dollars but I don't buy that for a couple of reasons, mainly size, capability and potentially pride, but could be wrong..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom