It’s from this video
US F/A-XX and F-X & NGAD - 6th Gen Aircraft News Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Vertical slabs are even worse.
Another view of the supposed demonstrator from the same Youtube video.
Adorable Whale cautioned that while the model shown in the USAF promotional video shouldn't be taken as "Yes, this is what the F-47 will eventually look like", he also noted the unusual black shades at the rear of the aircraft, which likely indicates the presence of vertical slabs there - Or it could be something akin to the GCAP's low-angle vertical slab design.
In the meantime, he wouldn't be surprised if the F-47 ended up being a "revamped/remastered F-22", given the multitude of other projects that the USAF must spend their budget on, some of which could occupy higher positions in the USAF's priority list than the F-47.
Last edited:
What would take higher priority than the F-47? Would it be the stealth drone wingman or something else?
If the Americans can get their system of aircrafts (CCA being the important component of it) going then they may still have a leg in the so called 6th gen race. Thats the problem though, I mean if they're penny pinching over just one 6th gen platform that has to get a PR kick in the butt from China to green light it.....
Moreover I suspect the majority of cost in 6th gen system of aircraft development is going to be in software, how CCA communicates with controller/sensor fusion/AI decision making...etc. Platform development cost is just going to be a tip of the iceberg.
PLAAF: Man it feels good to be rich
Last edited:
According to that he shouldn't have been sexting, the USAF's top priorities are as follows:
The above exchange occurred a few years ago while BG Finerty served as the USAF's legislative liaison director in Congress. His job was essentially to get Congress to "say yes" to the USAF's budgetary requests, and to this end, Talk about dedication!
Too bad things didn't "work out" for this aspirational power couple, but the USAF's assorted priorities, including the NGAD program, will almost certainly carry on (even if some of the programs are ultimately renamed and/or revised).
I'm usually inclined to agree with the Cute Orca, but in this instance, there's no way the F-47 is going to be a "revamped/remastered F-22."
Much, if not most of the manufacturing infrastructure behind the F-22 just isn't there anymore. It's one reason why the USAF has been so wishy-washy about making significant upgrades to its extant F-22 inventory: reworking these airframes, especially at a "deep level," can get very, if not prohibitively expensive with the production line long gone and the requisite intellectual capital largely retired.
If the USAF was desperate to make the F-47 more affordable and/or to expedite service entry, it'd make more sense to fit the F-47 with existing subsystems wherever possible, and then upgrade to newer and better sensors, powerplants, etc. at a later time when there's more $ for executing development and/or production of applicable subsystems at a reasonable pace.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I think one potential scenario to consider is that the core roles for the NGAD and F/A-XX may now be flipped, where the NGAD is the lower-tier lower-cost design, while the F/A-XX is meant to be the true top-tier challenger to the CHAD and SHAD.
I think what is becoming increasingly clear is that in 2019-20, when the first US demonstrators were flown, there wasn’t really a clear and coherent view within the US industry or defence establishment on what next gen fighters primary overriding design priorities should be. So what was flown was more of an evolutionary step forwards as opposed to a true revolutionary leap like the CHAD especially, and to a lesser extent, the SHAD.
The NGAD is basically 5.5 gen, where the thought process appears to have been that with both sides having 5th gens, detection ranges will shrink, so more likelihood of WVR combat, hence the canards.
It’s kinda amusing that the roles of the US and China seemed to have now flipped, where now China is the thought leader and America gets the benefit of being able to copy China’s homework.
The priority for the NGAD is to get in the air ASAP to not allow a generational gap to emerge between the PLAAF and USAF, even if only in name. I think the F/A-XX might be the clean-sheet design to truly take into account the new air combat vision the CHAD envisions.
From an operational standpoint, it also makes sense for the US’ true answer to the CHAD and SHAD to be carrier based, since that will be the most likely engagement route for both sides’ 6th gens to engage in combat. Although the carrier requirement will undoubtedly place significant design restrictions and limitations on the F/A-XX, so it can’t be as large as the CHAD.
I think what is becoming increasingly clear is that in 2019-20, when the first US demonstrators were flown, there wasn’t really a clear and coherent view within the US industry or defence establishment on what next gen fighters primary overriding design priorities should be. So what was flown was more of an evolutionary step forwards as opposed to a true revolutionary leap like the CHAD especially, and to a lesser extent, the SHAD.
The NGAD is basically 5.5 gen, where the thought process appears to have been that with both sides having 5th gens, detection ranges will shrink, so more likelihood of WVR combat, hence the canards.
It’s kinda amusing that the roles of the US and China seemed to have now flipped, where now China is the thought leader and America gets the benefit of being able to copy China’s homework.
The priority for the NGAD is to get in the air ASAP to not allow a generational gap to emerge between the PLAAF and USAF, even if only in name. I think the F/A-XX might be the clean-sheet design to truly take into account the new air combat vision the CHAD envisions.
From an operational standpoint, it also makes sense for the US’ true answer to the CHAD and SHAD to be carrier based, since that will be the most likely engagement route for both sides’ 6th gens to engage in combat. Although the carrier requirement will undoubtedly place significant design restrictions and limitations on the F/A-XX, so it can’t be as large as the CHAD.
Congressman Smith's cut.
Exactly like these funny comparisons regarding the Fujian and Vikrant, where some funny Indians claim "but ours was in the water first"!