Exactly, the manufacturing system has to be the primary priority. Then, designs can be changed as needed and available. Missiles are entering this new paradigm. Separate technologies are merged into one missile. Now, they must build them at much higher rates.
A valid point. Is a 6th gen fighter necessary in the next 10 to 15 years? I think what is important is adaptive cycle engine dev, and anti-grav capability. With those two developments 6th gen stealth airframes will be unnecessary. Mach 5 to15 speeds will make current SAM missiles obsolete. Directed energy weps will be the future. However, anti-grav tech will make practical Star Wars shield tech a reality. Whether these systems are manned or not is of little consequence.
I don't understand why the F-35 would struggle in air superiority combat with the newest AIM missiles...sort of negates the need for dog fighting when you can fire missiles way beyond visual range or at any targets behind you. The F-35 was also designed with open systems architecture which (theoretically) means that it could take all the upgrades of this lighter, smaller craft the Air Force is proposing.
@mjk9388 because we tried this before in Vietnam, granted the technology wasn't mature. The issue is with more stealthy adversaries on the horizon being able to detect them wouldn't happen until they're in short to visual range. At short ranges basic fighter manuevers and capabilities will be the difference between life and death. The F-35 wasn't designed to be an air supremacy fighter it was designed to be multi-role stealth platform.
The B-21 could possibly be considered a 6th gen fighter/bomber with upgrades. Who knows, what I do know is China is progressing rapidly and we seem to be in an arms race with Russia and China. Why can’t we divvy up responsibilities between NATO Countries South Korea/Japan. It would save money and if we go to war it most likely wouldn’t be unilaterally.
Technological reasons also exist for pausing the NGAD project. 1. Combined Cycle Engines, like the Hermeus may enable hypersonic fighters, which the current NGAD designs are not. 2. AI is developing at a phenomenal pace, and could greatly affect both manned and unmanned aircraft designs. 3. Both will impact future doctrines. We need to have a better understanding of future military combat doctrines to determine what we want in future replacement aircraft. We might skip 6th Gen altogether and go to the totally unmanned 7th Gen.
Until they do build unmanned ones, I am not considering them naming anything before that as "6th gen". It sounds like a sales pitch, not a clear demarcation of new planes versus 5th. What I am saying is even the NGAD/whatever generation sounds more like gen 5+, akin to the difference between gen 4 and 4+ or 4.5 fighters. The jump from 4.5th to 5th was basically the difference between having stealth characteristics and a few other perks. The perks did not make it 5th, the stealth did. Likewise I think fully autonomous AI-driven (not remote piloted, but thinking for itself) will be what separates true 6th from 5+. When human fighter pilots are obsolete even in air superiority contests, that is 6th. (Combined cycle engines, possible hypersonic performance, important perks, but not compared to true machine intelligence and the ability to remove that vulnerable piece of meat in the cockpit.) Well, that's my opinion.
@@wyldhowl2821 For me, what makes 6th gen is battlefield networking. No longer a plane with weapons, but a node which can direct or request weaponry from many other different types of nodes. Nodes in the air, on the ground, at sea, or maybe even space. A drone is just a type of node.
@@craigkdillon Sure, but if a drone(node) can react to threats and dogfight autonomously, without the need for any external control, it is now a fighter without a human pilot. And that leap in autonomy & intelligence is for me the defining characteristic. It can be in that networked environment requesting, perhaps even commanding, other sensor & weapon nodes, but non-human decision making would define it. Even if the plane is only as smart as a belgian malinois, knowing only that it has to protect a certain area from threats or hunt down a specific thing, that fact that it is able to do it all (sense, assess, act) "off leash" (so to speak) would be a tremendous difference in capabilities. Well, whatever, we are speculating about future events. The concept of generations has inherent flaws, so it all may turn out to be a moot point.
I'm confused. The whole 6th gen shtick is radar invisibility. We already have RAM Radar Absorbent Materials (that the public has been made aware of) that absorb 80+% of radar signal. Shouldn't we be focusing on this, to apply to existing jets. To make them Radar invisible. With what we know about RAM currently. This could be applied to the F15EX and a host of other fighters, reducing their radar returns by 80+%. Not perfect but it's current tech, and reducing a radar return by 80+ seems like a hell of a good start over spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the development of something that may never see the light of day.
I think it would be better to use current technology , by simply designing a fighter-bomber type where all missiles and bombs can be carried internally. This plane should be able to stealthy and dogfight like an F-15, but carries many munitions internally. Furthermore the use of that new Cycle engine would be better for fuel efficiency. Such plane would probably be with a twin engine and carry laser weapon for a stealth attack, low flying night attack. Yes, it would easily be the size of Russian fighters F-35 or slightly bigger. For affordability, having 60 of this might be sufficient and can be used only for surgical attack. The current fighters can handle most fighting because the standoff missiles and JDAMs can keep them attacking at safe distance.
Should not. No money for you, pal. Even harrier jumpjet outperforms it (which is already out of service). Navia has never proven anything in any war (and is pseudo-neutral today).
Why don't they just remake F-22 for the NGAD program with an S-duct engine intake, F-135 engine, and better avionics including EOTS and 360 DAS? That may keep the costs down instead of having to start over again developing all the new stuff.
Nope. F-22 is CRAZY expensive, unnecessary, and outdated. Everything they learned from making it is in F-35 for a fraction of cost, except maneuverability which is not even needed.
@@johnsilver9338 We have problems with the contractors. Most of them have shut down and some have moved to China of all places. The budget to bring them all back to production is actually more than the higher quadrant estimates for NGAD.
@@armandaneshjoo Not restarting F-22 production. But remaking F-22. Remake version based on F-22 but with the engine and avionics of F-35. Maybe called F-25? Plus USAF is looking for ways to keep costs down for the NGAD program. A remake version will certainly be cheaper.
@@johnsilver9338 I know exactly what you mean. I promise it won't be cheaper. I've never designed or built any planes, but my uncle has, my dad had a factory that made the parts, and I am a licensed mechanical engineer, so I'm pretty sure about this. F-22 was cheap because we had the industries. they are gone. F-35 is cheaper because it is mass produced. You cannot save money on design and testing, because design is cheap anyway and testing is critical. Time is also a problem we cannot get around. design takes time. Designing anything resembling F-22 in anyway is harder, more expensive, and less useful than just building new planes. Question is: Is it time design the NGAD or something else? my money is on something else.
1. 6th gen is expensive and pointless. 2. Air Force should focus on developing a silent maneuverable complement to F-35. that's all. it should not be a full replacement to F-22. that's too expensive. F-35 + a new plane can establish air-superiority. 3. They should focus on countering the Chinese J-series plane. F-35 can handle everything else for the next 20 years.
6th gen fighters will be fully integrated AI platforms that compensate for, or completely factor out, human error. This, combined with what we're witnessing in Ukraine will eventually revolutionize modern warfare as we know it. Hence, an AI controlled F-16 that won every single engagement and scenario it was recently put in. Imagine an even smaller drone sized fighter with the same capabilities for a small fraction of the estimate 300 mill per unit cost of the ngad? Makes too much sense. For everything else there's b-21's, F-35's, and more maneuverable 4.5 gens to clean up and do the dirty work.
Perhsps, based on the F 35, create a new one, let us say F 36, fixing all the limitations the F 35 has today… but superior enough ( better than F22) , man an unmaned versions, but less sophisticated and less expensive compared to NAGD program…
Should not going for new advanced unmanned Aircraft being controlled by F22/F35 in squads be the best solution? The problem for your US Air force to solve I would say is first of all is handling costs, both purchase and operational costs. But also at the same time find a solution in the missing range situation in the pacific to mention one thing. For example, regarding the range problem in the pacific. Would not the current F22 fleet adopted to handle a group "less" expensive UA buddies with focus on range, speed and especially BVR be a solution to multiply force there? The F22 will in that case be able to get the critically needed range with the new incoming stealth fuel tanks (and even more internally?) as less focus have to be own weapon load. Regarding F35, with its shortcomings, is still a very impressive aircraft especially as it seems to be the perfect combo with UA buddies.
Borrow more money from Blackrock. Might as well just turn over the rest of the United States' soul.😬 Sorry, sorry, I was just kidding, I know you're reading this and have on my information I'm sorry, Blackrock I don't know what came over me.
At 200 million per NGAD, 200 Tillion in debt and liabilities as a nation - this program is simply not affordable. Bad decisions, bad policy and internal strife have brought us to here. We will pay the price in blood one day.
Several of the questions can find an answer here: th-cam.com/video/Rhy5bEDl-zg/w-d-xo.html For context, please consider that Sweden is a NATO country and SAAB already cooperates with Boeing
Perhaps upgraded blocks of f35 will fill niche of ngad They are already working on a combined cycle engine for new f35s This engine, along with stealthy fuel pods, will also extend the f35 range, solving its shorter range for Pacific theatre
6.gen fighers will be able to fly at least 22000 meters..that increase their speed and range very much..to make this, 6.gen fighters need a new engine and larger wings..new engine can be adapted f35 jets ok but f35's wing area is not suffecient to increase its fly altitute.. and also 6.gen fighers will need a much stronger electric generator to meet its laser weapon needs to..on top of that ,to carry a laser weapon also require a space in the jet...6.gen fighters most probably will carry more missiles and bombs then 5.gen jets..thats all require new jet design..so yes..a 6.gen jets are needed
It maybe 😅right approach to get the FLF but at what cost ?US is always lean on tech for air power domination ? Will there be a cheaper men / woman human solution to political overkill ? Or just do diplomatic way correction right less be supper world cop ! Move money to house working poor !
I'm sorry, Megyn don't apologize for stupid people who don't care enough to learn themselves. This is why there has to be a qualified system in order to vote.
To be used in a war against China, the new fighter jet needs to have twice the range of the F-35, but this cannot be achieved with a small aircraft. If the missiles are mounted in the CCA, the weapon bay will not be necessary.
People are only focusing on the Air Force, the Navy needs a longer range interceptor to replace the F-18 a single engine light fighter will not do on a Carrier.
Show me 000 seconds into the US and its showing a turbine and it's showing steam come out do you think the strength of your material is reducing through that steam I believe it is
The threat situation may be changing drastically in near future. 1. If Russia loses the Ukraine War, which seems likely, Russia may be so devastated economically that it will not be a serious military threat. Not being able to build enough advanced fighters, even if its production base has the design capability. 2. China is collapsing economically. CCP's survival may be iffy. China's military buildup may be coming to a halt soon. A new regime may not be as threatening. So, our need for the NGAD may diminish, and the design requirements may change significantly.
Of course cost overrides are an issue.. because the people that are paid to watch where the American taxpayers dollars are going absolutely do not do their job because they're paid to look the other way.. If for once they actually did their job and pulled all the funding for a multi-billion dollar project and someone ACTUALLY was held accountable instead of just giving them more money maybe they would stop doing that..
There is just too much tech emerging ATM for the US Air Force to make an intelligent informed decision. Can the B21 handle the anti-air mission, should we go hypersonic with the Quarterhorse airframe using the Chimera engine or use a Rotating Detonation Engine, if we go hypersonic how do the drones keep up? There is a lot to think about and the AF DEI staff is going to have to pull their skirts up for this call.
We are decoupling. Inflation is projected to reach %20 to %40 before the war even begins. There is no funding. All new tech is dying. and war is coming.
We already have a single engine. Our military is stupid if they don’t build the NGAD
The NGAD is not just about a single engine. It is about pushing all boundaries and making the next F-22. They will build it after they defeat China.
F15 EX could cover some of the slots.
$1trillion is not enough, even for the military. The US has to be ready to fight a 3-front war.
@@armandaneshjooF22 is old, no networking. Relies on voice communication.
@@ViceCoin yup
I think the B-21 will be a bomber, fighter, EW craft, and missile truck. This will require variants but not redesigns.
I would love to see an updated YF-23 programm. It would be cheaper and more suited than an upgraded F22
Gigafactories stamping out the components and rapidly putting together air frames..........
Exactly, the manufacturing system has to be the primary priority. Then, designs can be changed as needed and available. Missiles are entering this new paradigm. Separate technologies are merged into one missile. Now, they must build them at much higher rates.
A valid point. Is a 6th gen fighter necessary in the next 10 to 15 years? I think what is important is adaptive cycle engine dev, and anti-grav capability. With those two developments 6th gen stealth airframes will be unnecessary. Mach 5 to15 speeds will make current SAM missiles obsolete. Directed energy weps will be the future. However, anti-grav tech will make practical Star Wars shield tech a reality. Whether these systems are manned or not is of little consequence.
I don't understand why the F-35 would struggle in air superiority combat with the newest AIM missiles...sort of negates the need for dog fighting when you can fire missiles way beyond visual range or at any targets behind you. The F-35 was also designed with open systems architecture which (theoretically) means that it could take all the upgrades of this lighter, smaller craft the Air Force is proposing.
It doesn't work riddled with problems
Fire canon plain cracks s stealth coating peals off in rain just couple things wrong it
If you don't believe me Google it
@mjk9388 because we tried this before in Vietnam, granted the technology wasn't mature. The issue is with more stealthy adversaries on the horizon being able to detect them wouldn't happen until they're in short to visual range. At short ranges basic fighter manuevers and capabilities will be the difference between life and death. The F-35 wasn't designed to be an air supremacy fighter it was designed to be multi-role stealth platform.
The B-21 could possibly be considered a 6th gen fighter/bomber with upgrades. Who knows, what I do know is China is progressing rapidly and we seem to be in an arms race with Russia and China. Why can’t we divvy up responsibilities between NATO Countries South Korea/Japan. It would save money and if we go to war it most likely wouldn’t be unilaterally.
Technological reasons also exist for pausing the NGAD project.
1. Combined Cycle Engines, like the Hermeus may enable hypersonic fighters, which the current NGAD designs are not.
2. AI is developing at a phenomenal pace, and could greatly affect both manned and unmanned aircraft designs.
3. Both will impact future doctrines. We need to have a better understanding of future military combat doctrines to
determine what we want in future replacement aircraft.
We might skip 6th Gen altogether and go to the totally unmanned 7th Gen.
OK, if we think this way, it makes sense
Until they do build unmanned ones, I am not considering them naming anything before that as "6th gen". It sounds like a sales pitch, not a clear demarcation of new planes versus 5th. What I am saying is even the NGAD/whatever generation sounds more like gen 5+, akin to the difference between gen 4 and 4+ or 4.5 fighters. The jump from 4.5th to 5th was basically the difference between having stealth characteristics and a few other perks. The perks did not make it 5th, the stealth did.
Likewise I think fully autonomous AI-driven (not remote piloted, but thinking for itself) will be what separates true 6th from 5+. When human fighter pilots are obsolete even in air superiority contests, that is 6th.
(Combined cycle engines, possible hypersonic performance, important perks, but not compared to true machine intelligence and the ability to remove that vulnerable piece of meat in the cockpit.)
Well, that's my opinion.
@@wyldhowl2821 good point
@@wyldhowl2821 For me, what makes 6th gen is battlefield networking.
No longer a plane with weapons, but a node which can direct or request weaponry from many other different types of nodes.
Nodes in the air, on the ground, at sea, or maybe even space.
A drone is just a type of node.
@@craigkdillon Sure, but if a drone(node) can react to threats and dogfight autonomously, without the need for any external control, it is now a fighter without a human pilot. And that leap in autonomy & intelligence is for me the defining characteristic. It can be in that networked environment requesting, perhaps even commanding, other sensor & weapon nodes, but non-human decision making would define it. Even if the plane is only as smart as a belgian malinois, knowing only that it has to protect a certain area from threats or hunt down a specific thing, that fact that it is able to do it all (sense, assess, act) "off leash" (so to speak) would be a tremendous difference in capabilities.
Well, whatever, we are speculating about future events. The concept of generations has inherent flaws, so it all may turn out to be a moot point.
I'm confused.
The whole 6th gen shtick is radar invisibility.
We already have RAM Radar Absorbent Materials (that the public has been made aware of) that absorb 80+% of radar signal.
Shouldn't we be focusing on this, to apply to existing jets. To make them Radar invisible.
With what we know about RAM currently. This could be applied to the F15EX and a host of other fighters, reducing their radar returns by 80+%.
Not perfect but it's current tech, and reducing a radar return by 80+ seems like a hell of a good start over spending hundreds of millions of dollars on the development of something that may never see the light of day.
I think it would be better to use current technology , by simply designing a fighter-bomber type where all missiles and bombs can be carried internally. This plane should be able to stealthy and dogfight like an F-15, but carries many munitions internally. Furthermore the use of that new Cycle engine would be better for fuel efficiency. Such plane would probably be with a twin engine and carry laser weapon for a stealth attack, low flying night attack. Yes, it would easily be the size of Russian fighters F-35 or slightly bigger. For affordability, having 60 of this might be sufficient and can be used only for surgical attack. The current fighters can handle most fighting because the standoff missiles and JDAMs can keep them attacking at safe distance.
I think the USAF should purchase the Gripen E. Mass produce under “enhanced” model than start retiring you older F15,16,and Ground based F18
Good idea !
@@giusmaximus9586 They could be put into the Arctic/dessert/mountainous freeing up other assets. Me thinkst 😉
Should not. No money for you, pal. Even harrier jumpjet outperforms it (which is already out of service). Navia has never proven anything in any war (and is pseudo-neutral today).
Why don't they just remake F-22 for the NGAD program with an S-duct engine intake, F-135 engine, and better avionics including EOTS and 360 DAS? That may keep the costs down instead of having to start over again developing all the new stuff.
Nope. F-22 is CRAZY expensive, unnecessary, and outdated. Everything they learned from making it is in F-35 for a fraction of cost, except maneuverability which is not even needed.
@@armandaneshjoo Hence why remaking F-22 with F-35's engine and avionics will keep costs down instead of a new NGAD aircraft.
@@johnsilver9338 We have problems with the contractors. Most of them have shut down and some have moved to China of all places. The budget to bring them all back to production is actually more than the higher quadrant estimates for NGAD.
@@armandaneshjoo Not restarting F-22 production. But remaking F-22. Remake version based on F-22 but with the engine and avionics of F-35. Maybe called F-25? Plus USAF is looking for ways to keep costs down for the NGAD program. A remake version will certainly be cheaper.
@@johnsilver9338 I know exactly what you mean. I promise it won't be cheaper. I've never designed or built any planes, but my uncle has, my dad had a factory that made the parts, and I am a licensed mechanical engineer, so I'm pretty sure about this.
F-22 was cheap because we had the industries. they are gone. F-35 is cheaper because it is mass produced. You cannot save money on design and testing, because design is cheap anyway and testing is critical. Time is also a problem we cannot get around. design takes time.
Designing anything resembling F-22 in anyway is harder, more expensive, and less useful than just building new planes. Question is: Is it time design the NGAD or something else? my money is on something else.
Unmanned 5th generation.
The tech is not there, it takes so long, it's too expensive, and it doesn't even offer a fraction of a drone swarm functionality
Next generation JETS,....
POLICE given "HANDBOOKS",....
2 and 2 go together like PB&J❤❤❤
1. 6th gen is expensive and pointless.
2. Air Force should focus on developing a silent maneuverable complement to F-35. that's all. it should not be a full replacement to F-22. that's too expensive. F-35 + a new plane can establish air-superiority.
3. They should focus on countering the Chinese J-series plane. F-35 can handle everything else for the next 20 years.
Saboteur bot. They want to stop life and breath, so that their fake satanic life is the only king.
If NGAD goes single engine, that leaves the B21 & the proposed UK/Japan GCAP. 🇦🇺 Take note!!!!
6th gen fighters will be fully integrated AI platforms that compensate for, or completely factor out, human error. This, combined with what we're witnessing in Ukraine will eventually revolutionize modern warfare as we know it. Hence, an AI controlled F-16 that won every single engagement and scenario it was recently put in. Imagine an even smaller drone sized fighter with the same capabilities for a small fraction of the estimate 300 mill per unit cost of the ngad? Makes too much sense. For everything else there's b-21's, F-35's, and more maneuverable 4.5 gens to clean up and do the dirty work.
And so the fraud continues - the unquestioned assertion that project costs skyrocket.
Perhsps, based on the F 35, create a new one, let us say F 36, fixing all the limitations the F 35 has today… but superior enough ( better than F22) , man an unmaned versions, but less sophisticated and less expensive compared to NAGD program…
Should not going for new advanced unmanned Aircraft being controlled by F22/F35 in squads be the best solution?
The problem for your US Air force to solve I would say is first of all is handling costs, both purchase and operational costs. But also at the same time find a solution in the missing range situation in the pacific to mention one thing.
For example, regarding the range problem in the pacific. Would not the current F22 fleet adopted to handle a group "less" expensive UA buddies with focus on range, speed and especially BVR be a solution to multiply force there?
The F22 will in that case be able to get the critically needed range with the new incoming stealth fuel tanks (and even more internally?) as less focus have to be own weapon load.
Regarding F35, with its shortcomings, is still a very impressive aircraft especially as it seems to be the perfect combo with UA buddies.
Borrow more money from Blackrock. Might as well just turn over the rest of the United States' soul.😬
Sorry, sorry, I was just kidding, I know you're reading this and have on my information I'm sorry, Blackrock I don't know what came over me.
At 200 million per NGAD, 200 Tillion in debt and liabilities as a nation - this program is simply not affordable. Bad decisions, bad policy and internal strife have brought us to here. We will pay the price in blood one day.
I fought in the recent wars. I (we) lost....twice.... our military decision makers are stupid.
Several of the questions can find an answer here: th-cam.com/video/Rhy5bEDl-zg/w-d-xo.html
For context, please consider that Sweden is a NATO country and SAAB already cooperates with Boeing
Perhaps upgraded blocks of f35 will fill niche of ngad
They are already working on a combined cycle engine for new f35s
This engine, along with stealthy fuel pods, will also extend the f35 range, solving its shorter range for Pacific theatre
6.gen fighers will be able to fly at least 22000 meters..that increase their speed and range very much..to make this, 6.gen fighters need a new engine and larger wings..new engine can be adapted f35 jets ok but f35's wing area is not suffecient to increase its fly altitute.. and also 6.gen fighers will need a much stronger electric generator to meet its laser weapon needs to..on top of that ,to carry a laser weapon also require a space in the jet...6.gen fighters most probably will carry more missiles and bombs then 5.gen jets..thats all require new jet design..so yes..a 6.gen jets are needed
It maybe 😅right approach to get the FLF but at what cost ?US is always lean on tech for air power domination ? Will there be a cheaper men / woman human solution to political overkill ? Or just do diplomatic way correction right less be supper world cop ! Move money to house working poor !
A single engine lightweight stealthy aircraft (without internal wwapons bay, so not full stealth). Hmmm that sounds a lot lkke Tejas ++.
Another failed program ( lcs, zumwalt, commanche, supercanon ERCA, F-35, ngad, etc...) 😂😂
I'm sorry, Megyn don't apologize for stupid people who don't care enough to learn themselves. This is why there has to be a qualified system in order to vote.
The 6th gen fighter needs to be UFO level technology that can fly into space and use lasers. Otherwise it is just another fighter.
To be used in a war against China, the new fighter jet needs to have twice the range of the F-35, but this cannot be achieved with a small aircraft. If the missiles are mounted in the CCA, the weapon bay will not be necessary.
People are only focusing on the Air Force, the Navy needs a longer range interceptor to replace the F-18 a single engine light fighter will not do on a Carrier.
Show me 000 seconds into the US and its showing a turbine and it's showing steam come out do you think the strength of your material is reducing through that steam I believe it is
Just another way to waste money. Build the damned thing we've been working on or stop.
Stop giving all the money to Ukraine ngad on hold because gave all the money to ukrain
I could have sworn I had be hit in the head with a big mallet. I was snoring within seconds.
this channel is clueless none of the scenarios given are even close to what is reality
Patrañas la industria militar de EE.UU ya es decadente.
More inportant projects like Ukraine
The threat situation may be changing drastically in near future.
1. If Russia loses the Ukraine War, which seems likely, Russia may be so devastated economically that it will not be a serious military threat. Not being able to build enough advanced fighters, even if its production base has the design capability.
2. China is collapsing economically. CCP's survival may be iffy.
China's military buildup may be coming to a halt soon.
A new regime may not be as threatening.
So, our need for the NGAD may diminish, and the design requirements may change significantly.
😂Bruh,Russia ain’t losing no war against Ukraine. Watching too much CNN clouds your vision.
@@lizardking3979 I see. Letting Ukraine take Kursk is all part of Putin's ingenious plan.
Oooh, sneaky.
F -35 Lightening II edit.
6th generation.
I have heard that the B21 Raider came in under budget
The B-21 is NOT over budget.
Of course cost overrides are an issue.. because the people that are paid to watch where the American taxpayers dollars are going absolutely do not do their job because they're paid to look the other way.. If for once they actually did their job and pulled all the funding for a multi-billion dollar project and someone ACTUALLY was held accountable instead of just giving them more money maybe they would stop doing that..
They need the long range in the Pacific. This sounds like an Elon Musk project.
pls not this idiot
The problem is that there is still not a real threat for the f 22.
and there never will be. The 6th gen NGAD is looking increasingly like overkill.
There is just too much tech emerging ATM for the US Air Force to make an intelligent informed decision. Can the B21 handle the anti-air mission, should we go hypersonic with the Quarterhorse airframe using the Chimera engine or use a Rotating Detonation Engine, if we go hypersonic how do the drones keep up? There is a lot to think about and the AF DEI staff is going to have to pull their skirts up for this call.
We are decoupling. Inflation is projected to reach %20 to %40 before the war even begins. There is no funding. All new tech is dying. and war is coming.
I don't see how this would have enough range to be useful in the pacific
Yep and the Chinese will create a true 6th gen stealth and we will lose the air domain
If the F35 and F22 are that far ahead as you imply why do you need these programmes