US F/A-XX and F-X & NGAD - 6th Gen Aircraft News Thread

[00CuriousObserver]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Pentagon Committed To F/A-XX Eventually, Studying Industrial Base Concerns

 

[00CuriousObserver]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

According to a fact sheet released by the HASC majority, the NDAA procurement plan includes $26 billion for shipbuilding, $38 billion for aircraft — including, notably, “full funding” for the Navy’s F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter effort, something that has faced headwinds from the Trump administration — $4 billion for ground vehicles and $25 billion for munitions.

 

[Andy1974]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is wrong and the article has been updated..

The compromise bill also provides some funding for the Navy’s controversial F/A-XX next-generation fighter, but only to the tune of $74 million a skeptical Pentagon has requested.

 

[siegecrossbow]

This is wrong and the article has been updated..

Why is FA-XX controversial?

 

[Andy1974]

Why is FA-XX controversial?

I think the controversy is its lack of existence. Or rather, it’s lack of possibility. Without the talent to make it, it can’t exist.

 

[AndrewJ]

TWZ writes another post on 6th gen every 5 days.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

When it comes to F/A-XX, Navy leadership has been very open and outspoken about the desire to continue with the program as planned, putting it in an unusual position of being very publicly at odds with the Pentagon.

“It’s my job to inform the secretary of war’s team about that imperative,” Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, the service’s top uniformed officer, told members of the press at the annual Reagan National Defense Forum this weekend, according to Breaking Defense. “I’m part of those discussions, but my job is to pressurize that decision because the warfighting imperative, I think, is there, and I’m trying to build a compelling case to get that decision made quickly.”

“I see threat curves are in some domains I’m diverging from where I’m being overmatched,” he added. “In no world will what flies off of [an aircraft carrier] shouldn’t be the highest-end platform possible to penetrate deep into a weapon engagement zone and have confidence with longer-range munitions that it can close that kill chain.”

“Does it need to be done at [sic] a cost-effective way? Does it need [to] be done [in a way] that doesn’t clobber our other efforts? Does it need to be done so it actually delivers in the relevant time frame? Yes,” Caudle also said at the forum, according to Aviation Week. “So hopefully some of this acquisition reform and production improvement can help us get those decisions.”

Navy Vice Adm. Daniel Cheever, commander of Naval Air Forces, and more commonly referred to as the service’s “Air Boss,” also told TWZ he was still “eagerly awaiting” the selection of the winning F/A-XX design back in August.

In October, Reuters reported that the Pentagon was poised to pick a winner of the F/A-XX competition, which had also pointed to a potential reversal of the stated plans to shelve the program. However, any public announcement of that decision has yet to be made.

The Navy could still take a wait-and-see approach to F/A-XX, watching to see how the F-47 program progresses, and leveraging that effort to help further buy down risk. However, doing so would delay how long it takes to get the next-generation carrier-based fighter into operation, and the threat ecosystem,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, as the service itself has been keen to highlight.

 

[Deino]

I think the controversy is its lack of existence. Or rather, it’s lack of possibility. Without the talent to make it, it can’t exist.

Pardon, but why do you think there is a „lack of talent“? I think no-one should underestimate any of the big US aircraft maker in developing a technically top-notch fighter! The bigger issues IMO are more management, political and budget.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Pardon, but why do you think there is a „lack of talent“? I think no-one should underestimate any of the big US aircraft maker in developing a technically top-notch fighter! The bigger issues IMO are more management, political and budget.

They have talent and best supply chain in the world.
The problem is they didn't do fighters from start to finish for quite a while.
Lockheed does, but they aren't invited; Boeing has some of it(f-15qa/ex), but not end to end.
Northrop...

 

[_killuminati_]

They have talent and best supply chain in the world.
The problem is they didn't do fighters from start to finish for quite a while.
Lockheed does, but they aren't invited; Boeing has some of it(f-15qa/ex), but not end to end.
Northrop...

What do you mean by best supply chain in the world? There were info graphs here showing US aircraft have parts made in China.

And a major issue in sc/logistics being the subcomponents are produced in different states all over the country.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Gloire_bb]

What do you mean by best supply chain in the world? There were info graphs here showing US aircraft have parts made in China.

That's parts, and unlikely high level ones.
Overall I don't think it's up to much debating US ecosystem for fighters is still comprehensively ahead of everyone else.
China is close/up to/maybe even better on the key parts and it's develop cycle much faster, allowed for more up to date designs roll off fast and smoother (courtesy of doing end to end projects fighter projects every few years), but overall there are holes.(Engines most obvious). There are no holes in US.