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

[SlothmanAllen]

Yes and from the other direction, these two flying B-21s are also the first B-21s that represent close to what the LRIP versions will be like. So they are also "prototypes" in the literal sense of the word prototype.

In this case, they are just blurring the lines a little and getting those advanced prototype B-21s into combat capable state after their primary informative purposes have been fulfilled. All it is is exactly what the US said years ago, they are trimming down the development cycle time.

These two are still prototypes built primarily to evaluate and assist in developing the eventual LRIP forms of B-21. In the same way 36011 prototype is assisting in developing the eventual LRIP J-36.

Yes, you are correct. That was my mistake and a misinterpretation of the word prototype on my end. Apologies!

 

[4Tran]

I am not sure... I wonder if they are willing to accept more risk with this program? On top of that, I wonder how much risk reduction was done through subsystem development over the past decade or so? Also, maybe F-47 isn't as advanced of a platform so the development time could have been shrunk considerably due to that?

I don't really think you are wrong per se, but we should at least account for the fact that this program might be handled very differently from the examples you gave. For example, the F-15 was selected in 1969, first flew in 1972 and entered service in 1976. It wouldn't be too far of a stretch to have the F-47 entering service around 2032 if we look at the F-15 as a baseline.

Anyway, time will tell what will happen with the F-47.

The F-47 is possibly the most polticially charged military program of all time so I think that all the rules go out the window for this one. I suspect that if the USAF is serious about hitting the deadlines they set for themselves the F-47 is going to see a lot of cut corners. We already know what a botched development looks like with the F-35, so this may be a repeat performance on steroids.

As for complexity, I think that it's completely inescapable. If the plane is tailess, then it will have to have a fully software controlled flight regime and who knows what other kinds of fancy software will get stuffed into it. Hell, I'm going to call it right now - the software in the F-47 is going to be a mess. Whether it's a mess in operation or a mess to upgrade; more likely it's going to be both.

It could be assembled with subsystems already developed but I think they are purposefully not saying they mean production version for USAF in 2028. The wording "first F-47" gives it away. The first of a fighter platform is demonstrator or prototype. They definitely flew demonstrators even scaled down models and aided with plenty of computer modelling but when the USAF says first F-47, I'm confident they mean first proper prototype like we had the "first B-21" (in prototype form) fly recently.

There are probably at least 5 years between the first flight of the prototype to a production model. This is conceptually a new type of plane and it's going to have novel features so there isn't going to be any way to cut corners without making major sacrifices.

I suspect it is intended to placate one Donald J. Trump.

Bingo. The date is chosen to fall within Trump's presidency so he can claim the credit for it.

 

[ougoah]

One thing we should note though with F-35 and how it's been "botched" is that the equivalent could also be true for J-20 and J-35. China does not report any issues just like it does not really report any breakthroughs and competency until it is considered to be a less sensitive topic for security. E.g. J-20 supercruising with full loadout on WS-10 engines was only revealed many years after J-20 entered service. China also doesn't talk much about program delays, problems, difficulties outside of small hints given by reputable sources.

In any case, on the topic of F-47, it's pretty clear that they mean first F-47 which by definition is a prototype. The claim from some NAFO insist that F-47 prototypes have been flying. This source of confusion is due to semantics from US official mouthpieces referring to demonstrator flights as prototypes. There isn't a great deal of universally acknowledged tight definitions for prototype.

Even now, both sides approach this differently. B-21 prototypes are aimed to be eventual combat capable service models while they are used to refine towards a B-21 LRIP version. This is the very purpose of advanced prototypes. They're trying to get advanced prototypes to do both things and it actually remains to be seen how effective this method can be in reducing development cycle time and quality (one aspect we won't really see even from the relatively transparent US).

I suspect the F-47 will be a similar deal to their approach for B-21. Cut down iteration models from the basic traditional minimum that the US used to take (true for F-35) and where the Chinese J-20 program cut down slightly by running things concurrently and having one prototype perform multiple evaluative roles:

scaled down concept demonstrator to evaluate general concept -> full scale demonstrator -> static and maiden flight prototypes 1 (at least 2 units) with subsystems to evaluate package as some initial step -> iterated and refined prototype set 2 (at least 2 units) with final subsystems -> Final advanced prototypes pre LRIP if required for any further changes from prototype set 2 this stage also helps inform production set up -> LRIP serial production which is refining manufacturing process -> "mass production" initial block -> future variants and upgraded blocks.

They just want to cut down the above significantly so jumping straight from computer model to full scale demonstrator (which is what they flew in 2018-19), then jumping to advanced prototypes (stage 2 and 3 prototypes) then doing LRIP.

B-21 is at advanced prototyping which is running concurrently with LRIP manufacturing set up and design of LRIP models. I think they want to get to that stage in 2028 with F-47. This would roughly translate to LRIP F-47s for USAF in 2030 or early 2030s if their programs go smoothly and on time with no technological obstacles that delay it or unexpected technical issues.

PLAAF's two 6th gens will likely enter PLAAF service in LRIP form before 2030. Keep in mind that reputable Chinese sources this year said various demonstrators for Chinese 6th gens have been "flying" since 2016-17. This also lines up with Yang Wei or some other CAC project lead that claimed back around 2018 after J-20s have been delivered to PLAAF that they have been working on 6th gen at CAC. He referred to it as J-20's replacement is already in significant progress work back then when we were still excited about J-20 introduction into PLAAF.

Beyond semantics of prototype and the obscure nature of what the US has flown and plans to build for 2028, it is clear that their program is behind China's next gen fighters and they are rushing and pushing hard due to politics alone even if they know they can't deliver what they truly want, they will be forced to deliver and not be seen as lagging China in introducing 6th gen fighters into service.

NAFO even came up with the crazy cope of B-21 being a 6th gen fighter at one point despite it not turning any better than a homemade kite due to the nature of that flying wing and barely able to touch mach 1 let alone go beyond mach 2 like J-36 and J-50 are clearly designed and required to do. So the claims and copium from NAFO on F-47 being an operational fighter by 2028 is just more of that delusion. We are talking about F-47 maiden prototype flight in 2028 (sorry aimed for 2028). They may shorten the entire development cycle but even then, it's considerably behind China's now. That much will only become obvious. F-47 aims to be at the stage J-36 and J-50 were at back in December 2024 and that's assuming those two were maiden flights of J-36 and J-50 prototype models.