F-47 NGAD (Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter)

[Corsair1963]

I think we should put every dollar into programs like the B-21, F-35, F-47, F/A-XX, CCA, and other drone programs. Instead of wasting time and resources on anymore legacy types.

[Corsair1963]

The U.S. Air Force Isn’t Prepared For What’s Coming

Key Points and Summary – China’s stealth revolution is no longer hypothetical. With the J-20 in growing numbers, carrier-capable J-35s emerging, and unmanned stealth projects maturing, Beijing is building a dense “system of systems” that erodes America’s once-unquestioned air edge.

-The U.S. still holds key advantages—combat integration, logistics, and sixth-gen programs—but the margin is narrowing.

-To keep superiority, Washington must accelerate fifth-gen output, scale munitions, field loyal-wingmen, and train for jammed, data-dense fights.

-Allied modernization is essential, too. Air dominance will be relative and shifting—not absolute—and winning will hinge on resilient networks, sustained production, and fast adaptation across the next decade.

Full article: https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/the ... ts-coming/

[juggernautalpha]

There's nothing that the F-15EX brings to the table that all the other more modern/last generation aircraft mentioned can't do and do it better.

The F-15EX has the fastest mission computer of any fighter in the world (ADCP2), its also the best choice for oversized ordnance carrier on a fighter (i.e. future Hypersonic weapons). Its also a better candidate for a drone controller as the WSO can prioritize drone management, and not multi task between piloting and operating multiple drones. It also has the biggest radar of any western fighter, only surpassed by the J-16 and Mig-31, all while being in a high speed, high G capable platform.

And for missions that don’t require stealth, its a better option, (i.e. day 100 of a conflict where the enemy still has a large ground force but is reduced to manpads and small drones for air defense) On a stealth platform, you are paying for the maintenance of the stealth coating weather you need it or not. If the F-35 can afford to go beast mode for a mission, then its better to send an F-15 in its place instead and preserve the F-35’s coatings.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

had the fastest. F-35s TR3 is faster.

[disconnectedradical]

I disagree in the case of the F-22 (upgrade) and F-15EX. Nonetheless, the point is that something has to give. The US Defense Budget is not going to grow much in the coming years. (if at all in real terms)

This is opinion that you keep peddling, against USAF’s stated plans for the F-22 over many years. At this point it’s looking like willful and deliberate ignorance.

Even under Biden administration with a generally less aggressive budget request, only the Block 20 aircraft were considered for retirement, the Block 30/35 aircraft have repeated been identified as a critical asset that will be operational and upgraded until NGAD/F-47 arrives. There have been no statements or plans on retiring them before F-47 is operational. Unless you want to suggest USAF is willingly wasting a bunch of money on new sensors for the Raptor, and making it the first aircraft to have AIM-260 JATM.

You’re basically suggesting USAF will somehow abandon its top end air superiority fighter by retiring F-22 early and leave that capability gapped until the F-47 is operational. That is utterly ridiculous.

You can continue to hold your opinion, but it doesn’t match up with reality and actual USAF plans being made and implemented. Continuing to repeat it is just making noise.

We can find opinions for everything everywhere, even in the USAF and specially in favour of something as big as Boeing which lobbies everything from the Government down to the DoD and the military itself.
I continue to stand by and maintain what I said that the only and sole purpose of building new F-15EX is to keep Boeing in the fighter aircraft business (and now, until the F-47 production starts).
There's nothing that the F-15EX brings to the table that all the other more modern/last generation aircraft mentioned can't do and do it better. Moreover, if there's really, really a need for the F-15EX (something that I don't believe!) then there's a simpler and much cheaper option:
- Upgrade existing F-15E Strike Eagles to F-15EX which is what the F-15EX really is: An upgraded F-15E Strike Eagle! With 218 F-15E's in USAF inventory there's plenty to chose from for a F-15EX upgrade to the F-15EX standard.

The first 100 or so F-15E Strike Eagles may be running into same issues the F-15C/D are having, they are running out of airframe flight hours, especially with constant use during War on Terror where they were one of the most used platforms for air strikes and CAS. They’re also equipped with weaker F100-PW-220 engines. Only the newer half of the fleet are equipped with F100-PW-229 engines.

I’m lukewarm about the F-15EX myself, but USAF officials, from previous CSAF General Charles CQ Brown to the current nominee General Wilsbach, and also former deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements Lt Gen Clinton Hinote, have all identified a very specific role in INDOPACOM that the F-15EX is suited for. Even former USAF secretary Frank Kendall, who was initially skeptical of F-15EX when he took office, opted to continue procurement after considerations. Of course there are all kinds of opinions even within USAF, but when this many officials find it valid, then I don’t think it can simply be dismissed as mere lobbying.

Again, I’m not too fond of the F-15EX. In my mind, ideally we’d ramp up F-35 production to 72 per year, so that we can reach at least 1,000-1,200 airframes by the time we get successor operational that builds upon NGAD/F-47 technology by the late 2030s or early 2040s. But for right or wrong, USAF and DoD has hesitancy over Block 4 issues and delays, and at the same time identified a niche that the F-15EX can fill, and that’s the path that USAF is going down.

But all this is getting way off topic from the NGAD/F-47.

[ricnunes]

The first 100 or so F-15E Strike Eagles may be running into same issues the F-15C/D are having, they are running out of airframe flight hours, especially with constant use during War on Terror where they were one of the most used platforms for air strikes and CAS. They’re also equipped with weaker F100-PW-220 engines. Only the newer half of the fleet are equipped with F100-PW-229 engines.

I agree you have a point here.
However half of those 218, 109 aircraft plus eventually a handful (but only a handful - only a few) of new F-15EX's would be more than sufficient for any "special USAF needs" (whatever that might be ).

I’m lukewarm about the F-15EX myself, but USAF officials, from previous CSAF General Charles CQ Brown to the current nominee General Wilsbach, and also former deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration, and requirements Lt Gen Clinton Hinote, have all identified a very specific role in INDOPACOM that the F-15EX is suited for. Even former USAF secretary Frank Kendall, who was initially skeptical of F-15EX when he took office, opted to continue procurement after considerations. Of course there are all kinds of opinions even within USAF, but when this many officials find it valid, then I don’t think it can simply be dismissed as mere lobbying.

Again, I’m not too fond of the F-15EX. In my mind, ideally we’d ramp up F-35 production to 72 per year, so that we can reach at least 1,000-1,200 airframes by the time we get successor operational that builds upon NGAD/F-47 technology by the late 2030s or early 2040s. But for right or wrong, USAF and DoD has hesitancy over Block 4 issues and delays, and at the same time identified a niche that the F-15EX can fill, and that’s the path that USAF is going down.

Of course the USAF "identified a very specific role in INDOPACOM" or whatever and of course top officials that were against the F-15EX are now in favour of it. They must be since the USAF must "play ball" with the government, afterall they take orders from the government and can never publicly disagree with the government.
I stand by what I said, there's nothing that other aircraft like the F-35 (and I'm not even taking about Block 4) can't do that the F-15EX can, apart from being built by Boeing and therefore "help" Boeing's fighter production line to "pump up" fighters until the F-47 production starts.

But all this is getting way off topic from the NGAD/F-47.

Here, I agree with you.
However there's a sort of a relation between the F-15EX and the F-47 where again, the former serves for Boeing to keep up building fighter aircraft until they can start building the later.

[mixelflick]

Can't wait to see the F-47, they're doing a great job keeping it under wraps.

I wonder if USAF keeps building F-15EX to have a "floor" of at least 400 heavy fighters.

150 Modernized F-22's
200 Modernized F-15'x/EX's
150 New F-47's

You can see that without new F-15EX airframes, the only heavy, twin engined fighters we have (in service) are 150 or so modernized F-22's. Sure, the F-47 is fully funded and likely "on the way", but they're not real until they're sitting on the ramp IMO. The F-35 can certainly perform air to air missions, but it's no F-22 and arguably not an F-15EX either. Can't get as high, can't get as fast and can't carry as many AMRAAM's/AIM-260's etc. Drones? Not here yet, so not counted.

Plus those 100 early F-15E's are long in the tooth. The EX would be a mighty fine replacement especially if we build more F-47's than planned (or new, upgraded F-35's Lockheed is talking about).

For the record, I hope we build all 1,750 F-35's.

[ricnunes]

You can see that without new F-15EX airframes, the only heavy, twin engined fighters we have (in service) are 150 or so modernized F-22's. Sure, the F-47 is fully funded and likely "on the way", but they're not real until they're sitting on the ramp IMO. The F-35 can certainly perform air to air missions, but it's no F-22 and arguably not an F-15EX either. Can't get as high, can't get as fast and can't carry as many AMRAAM's/AIM-260's etc. Drones? Not here yet, so not counted.

I can see the argument that the F-22 is better than the F-35 in many or even most air-to-air roles. However, I fully and completely disagree that the F-15EX is any better than the F-35 in any air-to-air role/situation. It doesn't matter if the F-15EX can theoretically (and I'll expand the "theoretically" down below) fly higher and faster (than the F-35) if for example the end result is being detected by the enemy at huge distances away because it has a RCS of a barn and as such it will become a magnet for enemy long range air-to-air missiles like the Chinese PL-15. The F-15EX won't stand a chance against upcoming enemy 5th/stealth aircraft such as J-20, J-35, etc... which will obviously be the mainstay of enemy forces somewhere in the future.
And I say that the can F-15EX "theoretically" fly higher and faster because if you start adding all sorts of external stores such as 12 Air-to-Air missiles, External Fuel Tanks, EO/IR targeting pod, IRST pod (ALL externally!) then the F-15EX suddenly won't fly that faster and neither higher (than the F-35).

There's a saying that says that "all roads lead to Rome" but in this case, "all roads lead to Boeing"...

For the record, I hope we build all 1,750 F-35's.

Problem is that money doesn't stretch, even in the USA. And if money is spent on "stupidities" like the F-15EX than and eventually less money will available for what's really worth which is for example those 1,750 F-35 (and the B-21's and the F-47's and...)

[disconnectedradical]

I think we should put every dollar into programs like the B-21, F-35, F-47, F/A-XX, CCA, and other drone programs. Instead of wasting time and resources on anymore legacy types.

How are you defining “legacy”?

You keep spewing this opinion, but it’s not backed by evidence, because again, USAF considers F-22 to be the bridge to NGAD. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s “legacy”, it’s the top end air superiority fighter that USAF needs for the most difficult counter air missions, a capability that can’t be gapped until F-47 arrives. There’s a reason they’re investing so heavily in upgrades for the Block 30/35 fleet (and even considering Block 20 upgrades), as the bridge to NGAD/F-47.

[weasel1962]

Do we even know if the F-47 can fully replace the F-22? My original impression was a single NGAP engined fighter, that will use adaptive tech to grind out the range improvements from the F-35 to reach the 1000nm combat radius target using a single engine. If it was twin engined, why would Trump have wanted an F-55? Same reason gives LM an opening for an F-35+.

[disconnectedradical]

Do we even know if the F-47 can fully replace the F-22? My original impression was a single NGAP engined fighter, that will use adaptive tech to grind out the range improvements from the F-35 to reach the 1000nm combat radius target using a single engine. If it was twin engined, why would Trump have wanted an F-55? Same reason gives LM an opening for an F-35+.

The F-47 is the result of PCA (Penetrating Counter Air) component of NGAD family of systems, and PCA is designed as a direct successor to the F-22 as a long range air superiority fighter. It’s a high speed, long range, sensor shooter aircraft, likely powered by a pair of 35,000lbf thrust XA102 or XA103 adaptive engines, and likely won’t have the raw maneuverability of the Raptor, but with much longer range, subsonic and supersonic. Takeoff gross weight is allegedly similar to the F-22, but with lighter empty weight for much higher fuel fraction.

So yes the F-22 will be replaced once there are enough F-47 operational, since it’s designed as the direct successor in terms of role. That said, the case for F-22 retirement being pushed back may happen if USAF requires more air superiority fighters, in which case the Raptor may stay in service while more F-47s are built. That’s a possibility, since USAF has historically required 300-400 air superiority fighters, and currently only 200 F-47s are planned.

As far as a smaller single engine NGAD, that was floated as an option last year (summer 2024) back when it wasn’t certain USAF would have enough funding for PCA, since it had to spend tons of money on other modernization like the LGM-35A Sentinel ICBM, KC-46, B-21, T-7A, etc. In fact the LGM-35A ICBM was specifically singled out as a reason for USAF funding difficulties since it’s going way over budget (they discovered that they had to rebuild all the silos and infrastructure). However the Trump administration sort of “solved” the funding issue by keeping the base DOD budget request under the FRA cap of $850 billion, but then adding another $150 billion through reconciliation, a politically sketchy move. But, for now it gives USAF the money it needs. That said, a smaller single engine aircraft based on NGAD technology can serve as an F-35 successor and replacement for USAF later down the line.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/kenda ... less-f-35/

And “F-55”? Trump talks out of his a$$, a lot. He may have been referring to F/A-XX, which is twin engine strike fighter, and got manufacturers mixed up when he was associating things.