Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Shown at the Navy League convention outside DC.

http://defensetech.org/2012/04/16/conce ... ngs-fa-xx/

F-16.net Sponsor

Sure thing. When this gets ready for LRIP @ $250 mill. a copy, everybody will scream "Buy the true and trusted F-35C for a fraction of the cost rather than this gold-plated device!"

Just like the F/A-18 Super on its out-year production compared to the JSF LRIPs today.

Is it alluded to be a "cheap" stealthified F/A-18 Super? Are we talking gloriously expensive 6th gen tech?

And most intriguingly: can it land on a carrier? (yay, we got plenty knowledgeable people to enlighten us on this on this board, I hope to encourage some of them Smile

)

Notice how they are calling it a "strike" fighter?

Are they trying to muscle in on F-35C territory?

By the looks of those bay outlines it ain't carrying much.

I'm gonna wait until APA tell me how good it is. Very Happy

"The F/A-XX sixth-generation fighter emerged as a hot topic at the Navy League's Sea-Air-Space Exposition near Washington DC today. The US Navy has released a Request for Information for a new fighter to replace the F/A-18E/F in the 2030s as of Friday 13 April according to Rear Admiral Donald Gaddis, the Naval Air Systems Command's program manager for tactical aviation. But while he is willing to say that the Navy wants far greater kinematic performance and greater range, Gaddis cautions that there will be a long analysis of alternatives (AoA) before any formal program starts. The Pentagon will also likely mandate a joint AoA with the US Air Force's prospective F-X sixth-generation effort, but the Navy and USAF requirements may not match up, he says."

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... -sea-.html

What exactly is supposed to make it "sixth generation" instead of just another member of the fifth? What's the new big change in technology?

F-35 has VLO, fully fused sensors, directional (Full-time) datalinks, 360 EODAS, IRST, etc.

F-22 has some of the above and m1.7+ supercruise and super-maneuverability.

What else is there to make the F/A-XX 6th gen?

Spudman - I believe the characteristics of the 6th gen fighter will be as follows.

1) Lower stealth than the F-35 and the F-22. Note the fully flat body, etc. That will give it a wider stealth performance, compared to the 5th gen fighters.
2) A new paradigm of engine technology. The plane will be built to handle the 1st and 2nd generation of ADVENT engine advances. This will give it speed performance approximating the F-22 and cruise performance as good as or better than the F-35.
3) Much longer ranges than the F-22 or F-35.
4) Here's the biggie: two pilots. One to fly the plane and one to control the attending drones.

As for those who are denigrating this airplane (already, and its just a concept). This plane is designed to fill in the gaps created by the F-35. And, if you support a diverse US fighter industrial base, then keeping the Boeing design engineers in the game is a very good thing.

All aspect wideband stealth
Some solution to the issue of RCS changing when control inputs are made
Long range at a variety of speeds
Better sensors
DEW
Holograms or something for visual VLO

Gaddis: "...the Navy wants far greater kinematic performance and greater range." The F-35C is planned to be at least equivalent kinematically to legacy 4th gen jets, and should have somewhat better range than the Super Hornet - which appears to be not good enough for emerging maritime threats. From the RFI:

"The intent of this research is to solicit Industry inputs on candidate solutions for CVN based aircraft toprovide multi-role capability in an A2AD operational environment. Primary missions include, but are notlimited to, air warfare (AW), strike warfare (STW), surface warfare (SUW), and close air support (CAS). Also consider the ability of your concept to provide other capabilities currently provided by strike fighteraircraft, such as organic air-to-air refueling (AAR), Tactical Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA), and airborne electronic attack (AEA). The trade space refinement activity willcharacterize a broad tradespace, to include unmanned, optionally manned and manned aircraft. Systemattributes and system capabilities will be considered in the context of cost and affordability. Concepts that are derived from legacy aircraft, “clean sheet” new design aircraft, as well as innovative technologyconcepts specifically tailored for the operational context are all relevant. "

http://www.scribd.com/doc/89726577/Navy-FA-XX-RFI-1

Arkady - that was a good response to Spud, but I disagree that any 'next-gen' follow-on should be a mere 'gap-filler' as you imply.

There's simply no way that DoD can afford to start an entirely new TACAIR R&D project as a 'gap-filler' between a fully funded F-35 acquisition program and some kind of extreme-next-gen F-35 replacement program. That is simply too many programs to fund and as such is simply not sustainable and not prudent.

A stopgap gap-filler for example would include modernized 4.5 platforms, at least until the US's clean-sheet next-gen TACAIR design could be delivered by around 2030 +/-. But any mid-term clean-sheet 5.5 gen program including some entry-level 6th gen components and systems should in my opinion infer that the F-35 would be cancelled outright. My views.

delvo wrote:

What exactly is supposed to make it "sixth generation" instead of just another member of the fifth? What's the new big change in technology?

I always take it this way, generation is defined by fighter's lifespan, not by technology.
If this one replaces F-22, then it is 6th gen, regardless of technology.
When fighters are retiring, you'll have to build a new gen, not the last design, and with whatever technology you have at the moment.

The bits of metal, composite materials and electronics do not care what they are called.

arkadyrenko wrote:

And, if you support a diverse US fighter industrial base, then keeping the Boeing design engineers in the game is a very good thing.

Well I do support US jobs, however, have little faith in Boeing design engineers as far as tactical fighters go. They have not produced a new fighter design since the 1930's (technically a fighter?). Their Joint Strike Fighter concept was ghastly. I'm pretty sure the design they are showing looks a lot like a Lockheed design from MANY years ago...looking for it now.

But c'mon checksixx, one has to give credit to a US manufacturer who can produce a mature FY13 F-18E/F with AESA and modern computer for a PUC cost of around $85m per copy (even if it's not an F-16 or F-15C), while an FY13 F-35A PUC cost (gross weapon system + initial spares) will run about $184m ea!

BA's engineers are not incompetent and are apparently getting the job done as needed, building a cost-effective platform, whether it's a next-gen F-15 or Super.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Latest F/A-XX concept