If they have designed a six gen fighter. I would like to see it given how much they have failed with the f-35 given the amount of problems they have had along with budget issues, I am interested to see how they could have done much give the current climate
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Considering that the US is the only nation with more than a couple dozen fifth gens, I place more faith in Roper for likely having an actual article behind his statements. This said What has been built is a full scale demonstrator. No one has built a production or prototype 6th gen yet. The function of a full-size demonstrator is just that to prove the technology. The heart of it sixth gen are 5 technologies that as yet we can only guess at.
Looking back historically this program is playing along the game plan of the F117. Where it starts in the black with established and emerging tech then fades to grey and eventually into the white. Roper in the past talked of the “Digital Century series” which is a stratagem of development where in they rapidly want to field small blocks of new fighters say 50 or so at a time with emerging technologies added to each successive blocks.
This is how the F117 was built.
The F35 and F22 represent the more conventional all up production scheme which has had issues. Yet calling F35 a failure begs the question compared to what?
The Russian program that has 14 units 12 prototypes incapable of operational use 1 destroyed and 1 not finished.
The KFX? Not even a finished prototype?
J20 a couple dozen units when F35 pass 560 deliveries.
J35 maybe 3 demonstrators?
F22 a truncated 195 built.
Unbuilt European models from the UK, France+Germany.
And what “Climate” are you talking about? If you mean Convid 19. Based on some earlier talk by key people it sounds like this isn’t a demonstrator that rolled out before the show but has been flying for at least a year in the black under the Navada skies.
Looking back historically this program is playing along the game plan of the F117. Where it starts in the black with established and emerging tech then fades to grey and eventually into the white. Roper in the past talked of the “Digital Century series” which is a stratagem of development where in they rapidly want to field small blocks of new fighters say 50 or so at a time with emerging technologies added to each successive blocks.
This is how the F117 was built.
The F35 and F22 represent the more conventional all up production scheme which has had issues. Yet calling F35 a failure begs the question compared to what?
The Russian program that has 14 units 12 prototypes incapable of operational use 1 destroyed and 1 not finished.
The KFX? Not even a finished prototype?
J20 a couple dozen units when F35 pass 560 deliveries.
J35 maybe 3 demonstrators?
F22 a truncated 195 built.
Unbuilt European models from the UK, France+Germany.
And what “Climate” are you talking about? If you mean Convid 19. Based on some earlier talk by key people it sounds like this isn’t a demonstrator that rolled out before the show but has been flying for at least a year in the black under the Navada skies.
It's basically leveraging reentry blackout against radar detection. However, wouldn't heat signature be greater? I guess it doesn't really matter when the projectile is moving so fast anyway.
That article has a glaring inaccuracy.
It states that " China currently holds the advantage in cruise missiles." which is factually incorrect.
It is the US which has a huge inventory of slow cruise missiles.
In comparison, China has a large inventory of hypersonic missiles.
---
And if hypersonic missiles can become even faster, that benefits the Chinese military in building even more missiles with more punch.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
A large Inventory? How many? Most open source don’t give a number. At best the assumption is IOC which means the barest minimum to operate.
the vast majority of known systems are Ballistic. Conventional IRBM.
the vast majority of known systems are Ballistic. Conventional IRBM.
SPACEX IS BUILDING A MILITARY ROCKET TO SHIP WEAPONS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD
SpaceX and the Pentagon just signed a contract to jointly develop a new rocket that can launch into space and deliver up to 80 tons of cargo and weaponry anywhere in the world — in just one hour.
Tests on the rocket are expected to begin as early as next year, . It’s expected to shuttle weapons around the world 15 times faster than existing aircraft, like the US C-17 Globemaster.
“Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere on the globe in less than an hour,” General Stephen Lyons, head of US Transportation Command said .
SpaceX and the Pentagon just signed a contract to jointly develop a new rocket that can launch into space and deliver up to 80 tons of cargo and weaponry anywhere in the world — in just one hour.
Tests on the rocket are expected to begin as early as next year, . It’s expected to shuttle weapons around the world 15 times faster than existing aircraft, like the US C-17 Globemaster.
“Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere on the globe in less than an hour,” General Stephen Lyons, head of US Transportation Command said .
It might get there but it won't get back. It will still be useful for some mission profiles but it has its issues.
broadsword
Brigadier
Or is it an ICBM? The report sounds like it is trying to euphemize the purpose.
This is merely transportation.
The Pentagon has considered this multiple times. Back in the 1960s and then again in the early 1990s. The USMC even considered i and, iirc, Bill Garrett wrote a position paper on it for them. It involved 'raider units' on suborbital variants of SSTOs where the rocket would take off from a LST and land for an attack. It was deemed far too easy to counter in a combat role: if you can kill ICBMs or even merely scuds, these raider SSTOs would be even easier. Even so, some in the Pentagon haven't lost interest.
Musk has been pushing the idea of suborbital transport for some time. He's been extremely good at getting the gov to finance his plans, whether its space or otherwise. This is just another attempt to get the US Gov to underwrite something he wants.