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

[Brumby]

@SB,

I think generally Japan has both the technological capability and capacity to advance its interest. IMO, the bigger hurdle is in the political landscape where there are constraining forces at work. I believe Japan needs to ramp up its defense spending as a percentage of GDP and with that it can then pursue some of the high value programs like the 6th gen. Until we see serious funding allocated to the program, it would matter little if Japan is technologically capable or not. 6th gen will be expensive - not just the R & D but cost per plane.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Nope

"Nope" is your answer to
Yesterday at 4:26 PM

did you post a fairy tale inside Sunday at 5:28 AM
"Each XF-9 can generate an extraordinary 180 kilowatts of electricity, which could be potentially be used to power directed-energy weapons such as lasers or especially radar-based microwave weapons that could fry circuitry in ballistic missiles streaking towards Japanese islands."

? please note this is a yes or no question

?

anyway you double down:

but you are showing ignorance towards cutting edge technology, namely Maser technology.
Basically it's a less celebrated cousin of the Laser which are both direct energy weapon technology.
If and when electronic components are hit by a Maser it will fry the circuits in the same effect as if they were hit by an EM pulse.

LOL

 

[Skywatcher]

Says the denialist and Japan bashers. LoL

Until the XF-9 starts flying a lot and enters service, it's just a tech demonstrator.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Until the XF-9 starts flying a lot and enters service, it's just a tech demonstrator.

It's an engine not a plane. It's also not developed to demonstrate anything. It's a prototype.

 

[Air Force Brat]

It's an engine not a plane. It's also not developed to demonstrate anything. It's a prototype.

Hence the X! in XF-9

 

[anzha]

First off, I think we need to have a mod call whether or not this thread is a general 6th gen fighter thread or focused on the two current US efforts.

Secondly, I'd suggest some of the commentary be dialled back: Lol et al. A moderate change in verbage might improve the discussion.

That said, Jura does have some reason for having doubts on directed energy weapons. They have been the Tech Of The Future for decades now and some believe they always will be. AFAIK, the Japanese have not been investing nearly as much as the US, Europe and China to develop said tech either. And the article's rhetoric is a bit overblown.

However, the supposed 180 kw is sufficient to power a military grade laser. 100 kw is what we used to say was a 'military grade' laser based on testing: you need that much power to successfully take down missiles and whatnot at a useful range. That doesn't mean you shouldn't get more if you can, but that was the thinking at the time I got to dink around in the programs at the time. Full disclosure: I worked for Northrop at WSMR-HELSTF on the them in the late 90s/early Oughts.

There is some significant progress though. The laser for the USAF SHIELD was successfully tested. The US Army is putting lasers in Strykers for 2021 with an initial 50 kw power for shorad use. They just awarded a contract to Dynetics to produce the first 100 kw laser on a truck. The US Navy is putting a laser weapon on a Burke. The Chinese are working on this, too. The age of the laser appears to be finally arriving. However, with the exception of shield, none of the US programs are meant for fighters or even aircraft.

And none of these are masers. Masers are what fry electronics. Lasers burn or can cause shock damage.

Will there be a laser on the 6th gens? Probably. Will it be a UberDuper Death Ray. Probably not. They will definitely change the calculus of missile engagements and almost certainly make the dogfight a historical relic if it isn't already with the helmet cuing.

That said, as I have pointed out in the budget analysis of the USAF NGAD request, the reduction in the funding request in conjunction with the official statements of no delays in the planned IOC as meaning riskier technologies have been abandoned. This would have been done to meet budgetary and timeline constraints. One of those technologies could be the planned DEWs.

We will know more over time.

 

[Jura The idiot]

... The US Army is putting lasers in ... The US Navy is putting a laser weapon on ...

to me, it doesn't mean much the Pentagon says it's "putting" stuff somewhere, as the Pentagon has been "putting" dozens of LCSs into the water and crippling the USN force structure this way

 

[anzha]

to me, it doesn't mean much the Pentagon says it's "putting" stuff somewhere, as the Pentagon has been "putting" dozens of LCSs into the water and crippling the USN force structure this way

I understand and totally agree about the LCS. I thought it was a really, really bad decision back when it was announced.

I can speak a bit as to lasers and their effectiveness - within some limits - and they do work with sufficient energy. The Pointer-Tracker systems are frighteningly good about staying locked on target and were so even back 20 years ago. I strongly believe they will be a huge change to aerial warfare when they come.

However, I have a lot of faith in the military - especially the army - potentially fscking up their acquisition, too: Thurgood is already talking about consolidating the 100 kw laser the US Army just awarded with the navy and usaf programs. I can't help but want to flip the table over it.

SHIELD is progressing. The PTS they used was not the one they have been developing. They need to integrate the entire assembly. Let's see if they meet their deadlines.

Now as for a 6th gen, we'll see what they come up with.

 

[Jura The idiot]

link to:

Thurgood is already talking about consolidating the 100 kw laser the US Army just awarded with the navy and usaf programs.

please


just asking, about ten (?) minutes ago read, inside

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
"Let’s talk lasers

There is a larger effort to decide which service will take ownership of the many specific directed-energy development efforts underway across the Pentagon, and an overarching departmentwide strategy is due out in the near term. That strategy is bound to present accelerated routes toward directed-energy and high-powered microwave weapons capabilities.

Yet, fielding a 50-kilowatt laser on a Stryker is so specific and critical to the Army that the service is moving quickly on it as more all-encompassing plans for directed energy take shape, according to Thurgood.

The Army will build four of the vehicles by late FY22, he added.

Building a Stryker with a 50-kilowatt laser is a major leap from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

at the Joint Warfighting Assessment.

Thurgood said the Army chose to move out on operational prototypes of a 50-kilowatt laser on a Stryker because the capability needs to keep up with brigade combat teams and because it challenges the service to solve the size, weight and power issues of putting a high-powered laser on a small platform like the Stryker.

The path doesn’t run far afield from what the Army laid out in its fiscal 2019 through fiscal 2023 five-year budget plan. In it, the Army said it would assess the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That solution is Stryker-based."


I mean if lasers for example on a Stryker were good for anything except talking about lasers on a Stryker, the Pentagon would already have them, no?

 

[anzha]

link tolease

Tone, please.

I mean if lasers for example on a Stryker were good for anything except talking about lasers on a Stryker, the Pentagon would already have them, no?

Actually, no. The Pentagon isn't some magic place that things just come into being because they are a good idea. Quite the contrary. The army especially for some reason. The Army managed to fsck up a lot of procurements in the last 20 years.

That said, lasers on Strykers would be useful for AD. Especially shorad. The THEL program used a 100 kw laser to shoot down mortars, 155mm, katyushas, etc. A 50 kw laser could still take down drones, mortars, and anything not flying very fast or at least not fast enough for its required engagement time. I have to tread carefully on what is a useful engagement time for power.

Solid state lasers have matured only recently. They could have 10 years ago, but the money just wasn't spent. After all, the Pentagon didn't think the Chinese or Russians would have peer capabilities, like J-20 or Su-57, operational by 2020. Oops. At least half way. They were thinking of dealing with COIN rather than peer fights. What you buy for a peer fight is different than what you buy for fighting COIN. Lasers are pretty useless in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq.

They were not a priority. That changed. Now they are. They are about 2 to 4 years out. Given Pentagon procurement speeds, that's very quick.