US F/A-XX and F-X & NGAD - 6th Gen Aircraft News Thread

[Deino]

Tired(of winning)cat

Trumpcat is the only appropriate name

 

[Hyper]

If it does have tails then it is game over for all aspect stealth. No amount of cope could help unless they are collapsible like what we thought J-XD had.

It almost certainly is a large inlet. F-32 had a funny inlet. Maybe Boeing really struggles with a proper stealthy inlet.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

The company which names their entry F69 will win the contract. Giggity.

Rocket 69

 

[talonn]

I guess they will name FA-XX as "F-50", in honor of "50 wins in 50 days".


View attachment 148779

F-50 vs J-50

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

Here a bit enhanced ... so maybe tails?

View attachment 148778

If it does have tails then it is game over for all aspect stealth. No amount of cope could help unless they are collapsible like what we thought J-XD had.

It almost certainly is a large inlet. F-32 had a funny inlet. Maybe Boeing really struggles with a proper stealthy inlet.

Imagine after all the hypes, the F-47 turned out to be a facelifted F-32. Holy sh1t.

 

[Hyper]

Discussion on SPF says that F/A-XX will not have adaptive engines.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Rocket 69

 

[SlothmanAllen]

Discussion on SPF says that F/A-XX will not have adaptive engines.

Yeah, I think that has been known for a while now. The Navy wants a more conservative approach to the F/A-XX. The Navy likely will need to build 300 or 400 hundred F/A-XX airframes at a minimum to replace the F/A-18 Super Hornet. This aircraft will likely take up the E/A-18 Growler role at some point, so that is another ~150 airframes needed in the future.

I personally expect something along the lines of the J-35 in terms of design, but a more aerodynamically sophisticated design tailless design is possible.

I think the Navy's prime driver is keeping cost as low as possible so they can build the required number of airframes while still providing a meaningful upgrade over the Super Hornet and meeting the need for the F/A-XX to be a strike aircraft.

EDIT: I think the most important thing to consider for the F/A-XX is that they NEED to build 300 to 400 airframes. They have to have those aircraft for the aircraft carriers. So I think the Navy has to be much more conservative with their approach to building aircraft, especially with fiscal constraints they face from other modernization programs.

 

[iewgnem]

Look again at the concept images in by SMG.
That’s a Twin engine bird. Every image that seems to show a LM or Boeing or NG NGAD was a twin engine bird. It’s always been conceived as a twin engine not a single engine or a triple engine or a quad engine or a Quinjet. It’s a twin engine.

again that’s making an assumption. If this is a maneuvering fighter top mounted inlets may cause problems as the fighter turns and banks.
F22 has a set of bleeds on her back to reduce excess airflow into the F119 engines. Or this could be them covering the bombs of the engines in the fuselage. Or it could be intakes.

Or it could be what everyone think it is, who knows.

 

[mack8]

EDIT: I think the most important thing to consider for the F/A-XX is that they NEED to build 300 to 400 airframes. They have to have those aircraft for the aircraft carriers. So I think the Navy has to be much more conservative with their approach to building aircraft, especially with fiscal constraints they face from other modernization programs.

Aren't the same cost constraints apply to the F-47 program/design? It looks to have canards which seems quite a conservative approach, at least for a 6th gen. What you make of it's probable design, engine (F-110 derivative VCE?) and likely number to be bought?