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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Next Gen Adaptive Propulsion is a foundational element of the USAF efforts to field #NGAD. #NGAP has now advanced to stage 5 of the 6 stage dev phase.

The GE #XA102 & the P&W #XA103 both build on the Adaptive Cycle Engine development, prototyping and testing performed on the XA100 (GE) & XA101 (P&W) #ACE, both of which were sized for a potential #F35 re-engine effort that would have added up to 30% range to F-35 A & C variants.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1892917207593521552
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1892917207593521552
 
Ainen said:
...was won by everything, and homefront of a stronger coalition of industrial nations, managing to remain in the war long enough, above all else.

Of all prewar investment, if one can single out something, it's two ocean navy.
All others were outweighed by later investment, or outright beaten.
Click to expand...

This is a thread for posting NGAD and F/A-XX news and analysis.

Not a thread for pouring gasoline and waiting to see who lights it.

Let’s try to stay on topic.
 
www.wicker.senate.gov

Chairman Wicker Meets with Secretary of the Air Force Nominee Troy Meink

www.wicker.senate.gov

U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today met with President Donald J. Trump’s nominee to be the 27thSecretary of the Air Force, Dr. Troy Meink.

In the meeting, Chairman Wicker and Dr. Meink discussed challenges and opportunities in the future Air Force fleet structure, including sixth-generation aircraft, unmanned systems, and American dominance in space.

“It was good to meet with President Trump’s choice to lead the Department of the Air Force. We have a lot of work to do to ensure that the Air and Space Forces own the skies and stars, including standing up the Next-Generation Air Dominance Fighter (NGAD), accelerating the procurement of the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), preserving existing and effective Air Force fighters, and constructing platforms that will be critical to a future national missile defense system. I appreciated Dr. Meink’s perspective on these and other issues,” said Chairman Wicker. “Dr. Meink also understands that air and space power are essential to America’s military rebuild under President Trump. I look forward to
Click to expand...
 
dark sidius said:
breakingdefense.com

'Let's be frank': Hegseth's budget shakeup will be 'painful' but there's 'hope,' Air Force official says - Breaking Defense

As questions hang over the future of the service’s Next Generation Air Dominance stealth jet, Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, the Air Force’s director of force design and wargaming, said that “the fight looks much better when NGAD is in it.”
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Adapting at Scale: A Conversation with Air Force Major General Kunkel

Dave Deptula from Mitchell was a lone voice in the forest saying the Air Force is the smallest, oldest, and least ready. Now even Democrat Senators like Gary Peters is saying it. Frank Kendall, CQ Brown, and David Allvin pissed away four years. They had to know it was getting worse, especially readiness. And at the last minute the self proclaimed father of NGAD decided to wet the bed and pause the manned platform for more studies. Kunkle bolstered his support for the need for NGAD by citing the results from war games. But wasn't this information already available?

I find it odd that the recapitalization of the Air Force was not one of Trump's priorities. Shipbuilding is capital intensive and has the added benefit of allowing legislators to bring pork back to the district. That's why LCS couldn't be killed even long after people figured out it was near useless. If the AF is smart they find a way to get Trump to Area 51 to see the NGAD demonstrators.
 
B2Blain said:
I find it odd that the recapitalization of the Air Force was not one of Trump's priorities.
Click to expand...

The Air Force has been moving towards a smaller fighter force for some time now. F-15s are being replaced. F-35 and F-16 will not be. The F-22 was to be replaced by NGAD.

The Air Force has other acquisition programs that they feel are higher priority. They also do not think that Congress will go for the "sticker price" of a new manned air superiority fighter, and anything less than that will have Congress say "you have F-35 at home".
 
quellish said:
The Air Force has been moving towards a smaller fighter force for some time now. F-15s are being replaced. F-35 and F-16 will not be. The F-22 was to be replaced by NGAD.

The Air Force has other acquisition programs that they feel are higher priority. They also do not think that Congress will go for the "sticker price" of a new manned air superiority fighter, and anything less than that will have Congress say "you have F-35 at home".
Click to expand...

I don’t see how they can continue on that path with scale and pace of Chinese modernization. They need to recapitalize most of the Air Force otherwise they will fall behind in technology and numbers.
 
dark sidius said:
breakingdefense.com

'Let's be frank': Hegseth's budget shakeup will be 'painful' but there's 'hope,' Air Force official says - Breaking Defense

As questions hang over the future of the service’s Next Generation Air Dominance stealth jet, Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, the Air Force’s director of force design and wargaming, said that “the fight looks much better when NGAD is in it.”
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
Asked about reforms to the requirements process, including the at-times-cumbersome Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System, Kunkel said a key lesson from the war in Ukraine has been the value of rapidly iterating systems that are then quickly delivered to the field. That necessity, in turn, will likely require a different way of doing business. (end of article)
How does the above not argue for a modular family of UAS, and missiles as well as some sort melding of missile/UAS as more of a priority than manned craft?
 
SlothmanAllen said:
I don’t see how they can continue on that path with scale and pace of Chinese modernization. They need to recapitalize most of the Air Force otherwise they will fall behind in technology and numbers.
Click to expand...

“Digital century series” acquisition and sustainment model. They are still limited by how quickly and reliably Congress can authorize funds though.

This is already very much happening across the Air Force.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
www.defensenews.com

Trump associate floats idea of transatlantic warplane program

In an interview with Defense News, Paolo Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

In a phone interview with Defense News, Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme, which groups the U.K., Italy and Japan.

As the U.S. focuses on its own concepts for the sixth generation fighter, Zampolli said a unified program, was “a very wise idea” since it would save funds for both the U.S. and the U.K., Italy and Japan.
 
zebra159357 said:
www.defensenews.com

Trump associate floats idea of transatlantic warplane program

In an interview with Defense News, Paolo Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

In a phone interview with Defense News, Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme, which groups the U.K., Italy and Japan.

As the U.S. focuses on its own concepts for the sixth generation fighter, Zampolli said a unified program, was “a very wise idea” since it would save funds for both the U.S. and the U.K., Italy and Japan.
Click to expand...
That isn't going to happen, because Europe already knows they can't trust the U.S. now. This is a complete non-starter.
 
zebra159357 said:
www.defensenews.com

Trump associate floats idea of transatlantic warplane program

In an interview with Defense News, Paolo Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

In a phone interview with Defense News, Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme, which groups the U.K., Italy and Japan.

As the U.S. focuses on its own concepts for the sixth generation fighter, Zampolli said a unified program, was “a very wise idea” since it would save funds for both the U.S. and the U.K., Italy and Japan.
Click to expand...
Public Service Announcement:

Don't do drugs kids. They'll rot your brain.
 
Plus the issues with ITAR and US technology transfer/sharing, that's why the Japanese are with Europe. I still don't get it, we have been handing out F-35s like candy but push back regarding European and Japanese cooperation.
 
zebra159357 said:
www.defensenews.com

Trump associate floats idea of transatlantic warplane program

In an interview with Defense News, Paolo Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

In a phone interview with Defense News, Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme, which groups the U.K., Italy and Japan.

As the U.S. focuses on its own concepts for the sixth generation fighter, Zampolli said a unified program, was “a very wise idea” since it would save funds for both the U.S. and the U.K., Italy and Japan.
Click to expand...
How long did it take to get the F-35 designed? and that was just to US specs, IIRC...
 
Scott Kenny said:
How long did it take to get the F-35 designed? and that was just to US specs, IIRC...
Click to expand...
"As the only Level 1 partner in SDD, the UK had significant input into the design requirements of the F-35 to ensure that it meets UK operational requirements. " LockMart evidence to the UK Defence Select Committee
 
zebra159357 said:
www.defensenews.com

Trump associate floats idea of transatlantic warplane program

In an interview with Defense News, Paolo Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

In a phone interview with Defense News, Zampolli said he had been discussing the idea of the U.S. entering the tri-nation Global Combat Air Programme, which groups the U.K., Italy and Japan.

As the U.S. focuses on its own concepts for the sixth generation fighter, Zampolli said a unified program, was “a very wise idea” since it would save funds for both the U.S. and the U.K., Italy and Japan.
Click to expand...
Elon's been sharing his stash again.
 
quellish said:
The Air Force has been moving towards a smaller fighter force for some time now. F-15s are being replaced. F-35 and F-16 will not be. The F-22 was to be replaced by NGAD.

The Air Force has other acquisition programs that they feel are higher priority. They also do not think that Congress will go for the "sticker price" of a new manned air superiority fighter, and anything less than that will have Congress say "you have F-35 at home".
Click to expand...
The move to a smaller, older, least ready force is budget driven. Two thirds of the Air Force inventory of aircraft are at least 50 years old.
 
TomcatViP said:
The cancelation of the stealthy tanker means that NGAD will be that gigantic, expensive airframe the AF debated in length it should not be.
Click to expand...
You mean that the USAF debated at length that Congress would balk at paying for.



TomcatViP said:
The FQ component will also need range, hence grow in weight.
Click to expand...
Sure, for Increments 2 and beyond.
 
Scott Kenny said:
As long as the USAF is stuck in "pick one" budgets, I understand why. But a fight with China will see tankers blown out of the sky in a big hurry.
Click to expand...
It seems that NGAS is another one of Frank Kendall's failed trial balloons. Remember when he proposed a B-21 unmanned companion, then reversing course year later? We can't afford NGAD at $300 million a pop, but we are going to develop a stealthy tanker that is bigger than NGAD but smaller than KC-46.

It was dumb on two accounts. The "oldest, smallest, and least ready" Air Force is in the middle of recapitalizing almost everything - trainers, tankers, AWACS, fighter, the F-22, ICBMs, etc. It was also going to add a very expensive stealth tanker which would also be technically very challenging? How do you ensure the boom is low observable? And what about the CONOPS? Would there be enough fuel to offload which would be tactically meaningful? Last, how was all this going to be paid for?

It would seem that it would be much more cost efficient to build range into NGAD and the F-35 through an adaptive engine than spend billions on a stealth tanker. Improve active and passive air defenses at bases in the region and stockpile munitions and fuel to support a stand in force. With adequate air defenses and CCA escorts for HVAs, tankers should be able to top off US fighters from sanctuaries in the Western Pacific before entering contested airspace.

Once NGAD and CCAs are fielded, the AF can revisit a low observable tanker platform. Perhaps it will be unmanned and similar in size to a MQ-25?
 
This illogical on many senses.
First you question the feasibility of NGAS and then suggest the MQ-25.
Then you suggest that the priority should go on NGAD-giant when all account weights on an integrated battle force. The force needs to be coherent to pack a lethal punch, timely and dynamically.
And last you suggests encroaching a strategic assets to the efficiency of CCA in DCA and escort roles, something that hasn't even been demonstrated.

That's a lot of risks.

My take:
The late reconfiguration of the Airforce comes with a new administration that has been long in their planning. We can see that an alignment with Russia is one of the surprising outcome.
I say their intend is to turn upside down the island chain paragdym, bringing a new partner at the chess board.
I have joked long ago that to sideline the need to have NGAD made a giant, the US should invade preemptively Taiwan.
Well, it seems there is a more outwardly solution ;)
 
DWG said:
Only if you're thinking of external shape/original design date. Their internals are considerably more modern, and the airframes are newer, if still on the ageing side in many cases.
Click to expand...
Older stay older in face of the new Chinese capacity, you can put a big computer or beautiful screen in a old plane it stay a old plane.
 
jsport said:
the more the high performance, stealth bomber, missile truck, tanker, transport the depictions look the better.
Click to expand...
Money on NGAD the other can wait , Stealth tanker is a waste of money , USAF can use the NAvy MQ-25 for contested place.
 
TomcatViP said:
The cancelation of the stealthy tanker means that NGAD will be that gigantic, expensive airframe the AF debated in length it should not be.
The FQ component will also need range, hence grow in weight.
Click to expand...

Its simple logic
1. You can only afford a fighter or a tanker, not both
2. You can shape the battlefield to make an existing tanker survivable through disrupting enemy sensor platforms, increased monitoring of the location of enemy assets, and deterrence (making the asset too costly to attack).
3. You cant fight without fighters.
 
WatcherZero said:
Its simple logic
1. You can only afford a fighter or a tanker, not both
2. You can shape the battlefield to make an existing tanker survivable through disrupting enemy sensor platforms, increased monitoring of the location of enemy assets, and deterrence (making the asset too costly to attack).
3. You cant fight without fighters.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that not be more costly at the end? See:
- attrition
- larger mission package
- lower sorties rate
- immobilize few opponents Defence to be countered.

On the opposite, a NGAS sustained mission require less aircraft, can generate more missions (less participating aircraft that required less offloaded fuel) and are very tough to be countered while requiring a large number of a/c to do so.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom