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

Scratch

Captain
Northrop is contemplating the answers to the demands of 6th gen fighters.
There's the ever interesting speed vs. range, with the latter being favoured over the first.
Then there is heat management with ever more powerfull sensors and effectors, i.e. lasers.
The manned vs. unmanned, with a teaming option.
And, perhaps the most interesting here, data / comms protection via a system that is self aware and able to recognize and attack hacks like the human imune system.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Northrop Lays Out Vision for ‘Cyber Resilient’ Next-Gen Fighter
Lara Seligman 12:51 p.m. EST January 15, 2016

PALMDALE, Calif — Northrop Grumman is still ramping up its work on the Pentagon’s most advanced fighter jet, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, but the company is already thinking about what comes next.

Tom Vice, president of Northrop’s aerospace sector, this week laid out his vision for a long-range, potentially unmanned fighter, featuring laser weapons and advanced “cyber resiliency” to counter threats in the increasingly connected world of 2030.

[...]

Northrop, a subcontractor on the F-35, will also make a bid as prime contractor for the sixth-generation fighter, Vice told reporters Jan. 14 during a media trip to Northrop’s Palmdale, Calif. facility. The company is involved in several trade studies to determine performance parameters for the next-generation jet, according to Chris Hernandez, company vice president of research, technology and advanced design.

[...]

One major problem the Pentagon must confront is protecting aircraft data and lines of communications in a world where cyber hacking is the norm. The government can’t thwart every cyber attack — instead, it must be able to detect the intrusion and prevent damage, Vice said.

“The human body today is susceptible to infection, so the idea of blocking at the skin surface any infection entering the skin — it’s just impossible to do. The question is, when you are infected, what does your body do?” Vice said. “Your body has an incredible system called white blood cells that attack and try to manage that virus in such a way that prevents it from harming the body. The systems in 2030 will have something very similar.”

The next generation of air dominance will leverage a digital version of a white blood cell, able to inoculate a system to prevent a cyber infection from spreading, Vice said.

Another key consideration for industry is finding the perfect balance of speed and range. Although speed and maneuverability have historically been dominant factors in developing fighters, Hernandez said he believes the future plane could trade speed for endurance. Range will be increasingly critical in a world with limited basing, he emphasized.

“Range and speed are orthogonal — subsonic airplanes have significantly more endurance than supersonic aircraft,” Hernandez said. “So it’s too early to say, but it’s quite possible that the next-gen fighters will have supersonic capability, but maybe not to the maximum extent that we have today in some fighters because endurance is going to be what’s important.”

One challenge for the sixth-generation fighter will be better managing the heat generated by advanced capabilities such as supersonic speed or directed-energy weapons. Thermal management is particularly difficult when you add a high-powered laser weapon system to the mix, Vice said. Today’s answers to heat management are “insufficient,” he stressed.

“How do we think about a high-powered laser weapon system sitting on a supersonic airplane that in itself . . . wants to generate heat?” Vice said. “So we’re spending an enormous amount of time on each of those technologies — one of them was how do we think about harnessing heat and reusing that heat in very innovative ways in the future.”

The Pentagon and industry must also address the question of whether or not the sixth-generation fighter will be manned. But the answer is not quite that simple, Vice said: Perhaps the operator is not physically sitting in the plane, but rather he or she is controlling the mission remotely.

“Do you keep the man or woman in the jet, or do you keep the man or woman in the mission?” Vice said. “I think the jury is out whether you really do need somebody in the cockpit.”

A future fighter fleet could include a mix of manned and autonomous aircraft, lead by a “mission commander” who directs the unmanned assets, Hernandez said. ...
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Northrop is contemplating the answers to the demands of 6th gen fighters.
There's the ever interesting speed vs. range, with the latter being favoured over the first.
Then there is heat management with ever more powerfull sensors and effectors, i.e. lasers.
The manned vs. unmanned, with a teaming option.
And, perhaps the most interesting here, data / comms protection via a system that is self aware and able to recognize and attack hacks like the human imune system.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Hmmm...reminiscent of the 2005 film, "Stealth", nicht wahr?
 

Brumby

Major
Northrop is contemplating the answers to the demands of 6th gen fighters.
There's the ever interesting speed vs. range, with the latter being favoured over the first.
Then there is heat management with ever more powerfull sensors and effectors, i.e. lasers.
The manned vs. unmanned, with a teaming option.
And, perhaps the most interesting here, data / comms protection via a system that is self aware and able to recognize and attack hacks like the human imune system.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I have the view that endurance will prevail over speed because of emerging capability gap in range and heat foot print that comes from speed. I see a potential convergence of the LRSB and 6th gen platform giving meaning to the notion of a LRSB lite. I see the LRSB as simply a very highly capable wide spectrum electronics platform and the 6th gen platform with some shade of it.

The notion of unmanned from missions perspective is not new but the hurdles remain significant. Primary is line of sight restriction to approx. 200 nm due to earth curvature. More problematic is that data links are highly susceptible to degradation no matter how secure it is. Cutting the string from a kite suggest a highly risky concept.
 

Brumby

Major
Sixth-Gen Fighter Likely Won’t Be Common Across Services, Air Force General Says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


WASHINGTON — In a departure from the dual-service F-35 effort, the Pentagon’s sixth-generation fighter jet likely won’t be common between the US Air Force and the US Navy, a top Air Force general said Friday.

The next generation of fighters likely will be designed as separate aircraft across the services because the Air Force and Navy will have unique mission requirements in future decades, said Lt. Gen. James “Mike” Holmes, Air Force deputy chief of staff for plans and requirements. The sixth-generation fighter jet will replace the Air Force’s F-22s and the Navy’s F/A-18s in the 2030s.

“We will have some different requirements for what we need based on the different things we are expected to provide for the joint force,” Holmes told reporters. “We will use common technologies and maybe some common things, but at this point we think it will be a different enough mission that it won’t be the same airplane.”

This is a departure from recent history, as the fifth-generation F-35 joint strike fighter will be used by the Air Force, Navy, and US Marine Corps. The F-35 was designed as a joint-service fighter, with three different variants built for the various services.

Last year, the Navy and Air Force said they were set to begin a joint analysis of alternatives to explore solutions to ensure air superiority into the 2030s and beyond. While the Navy went ahead with its AOA, the Air Force decided to delay its own effort, Holmes said. Still, the two services are collaborating closely on the project, he stressed.

“We took a year out on purpose to try to bring in a broader picture,” Holmes said.

Instead of moving forward with the AOA, the Air Force stood up a Capability Collaboration Team (CCT) to study the possibilities for a sixth-generation fighter. The Air Force worked with industry, the other services, academia, scientists and government research centers to narrow the options down to two, Holmes said. The team will brief Air Force leadership on its findings in the spring, he said.

“With a multi-domain Air Force, we’re going to approach problems with multi-domain solutions,” Holmes said. “We wanted to open the aperture and take a look at what space, cyber and air capabilities can come to bear to try to regain that capability advantage we had in air-to-air against our potential threats.”
The Air Force has included money in various funding streams within its fiscal 2017 budget request for experimentation and technology demonstration in order to minimize risk for the sixth-generation fighter in the long term, Holmes said. The service’s funding profile for next-generation air dominance — which is not limited to the sixth-gen fighter — includes $20.6 million in fiscal 2017, and about $13 million each in fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2019 for research and development, according to official budget documents. The Air Force also included $75 million in fiscal 2017 through fiscal 2019 for “innovation and experimentation,” which could be used for sixth-gen fighters, according to a service spokeswoman.

The Air Force will decide this year exactly how to spend that cash, Holmes said.

“And so in the short term," Holmes said, there "is some experimentation and some technology demonstration that's being done to try to reduce the risk on the kinds of capabilities that we think should end up in that family of systems."
 

Brumby

Major
.S. Air Force looks ahead to 'family' of next air dominance weapons
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Feb 18 The U.S. Air Force is nearing completion of a study about U.S. air dominance in 2030 that will lay the groundwork for future purchases of a "family" of new combat weapons that could include a fighter jet, a top general said Thursday.

Lieutenant General Mike Holmes, deputy chief of staff of the Air Force for strategic plans and requirements, told reporters the study should be presented to top Air Force leaders next month. The next step would be a formal analysis of alternatives, which would pave the way for a new acquisition program in coming years, he said.

Lockheed Martin Corp, maker of the F-35 and F-22 fighter jets, Boeing Co, which builds the F/A-18E/F and F-15 fighter jets, and Northrop Grumman Corp, maker of unmanned planes and large parts of the F-35 and F/A-18 jets, are watching closely for clues about the future weapons program.

The Air Force is slated to declare an initial squadron of radar-evading, fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets ready for combat this August after 15 years of development work. But advances in radar technologies by Russia and China have prompted U.S. military leaders to start thinking about the next generation of combat planes beyond the F-35.

"It won't be just one airframe that comes out of it. It'll be a family of systems that helps us make sure we can guarantee the air superiority that the joint force depends on," Holmes told reporters after a speech hosted by the Air Force Association, a booster group for the service.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
.S. Air Force looks ahead to 'family' of next air dominance weapons
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lockheed Martin's Skunk works Rob Weiss tells us we likely will not have a true six gen aircraft for nearly 30 years, that there is NO clear definition or direction to proceed with the six gen airframe. I have been, and continue to be a strong proponent of re-opening the F-22 line with a "heavy Raptor, with more fuel, and more thrust, and forgetting the OVT"?

Rob tells that the most important priority is to keep the F-22 and the F-35 upgraded and cutting edge, he states for the record that our 5th gens are far more capable than the fifth gens in development by our near peers, and that 4th gens are NOT going to be able to compete.
I am certain that Jeff Head agrees with me, that we NEED more Raptor's in the interim to bridge the gap. The F-35 is a very capable airplane in and of its own rite, but it is single engine, it will NOT supercruise, and is NOT capable of dominating the upper altitudes. Two secrets of the Raptor's total airsuperiority!
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
6th gen fighter NG ad:

I would remind everyone, that as of today, and into the near future, these designs/drawings/dreams are "Popular Mechanics" cover candy.
(those of you over fifty know what I'm saying) the article Mr. Brumby has posted in the F-35 thread gives you Rob Weiss's of the LockMart Skunk works insider scoop as to where development of the sixth gen is in the "real world", he states likely up to "3 decades out".

You can and should "make bank" on Mr. Weiss, fanboy eyes glazed dreaming aside!
 

Brumby

Major
Beyond the Fighter Jet: The Air Force of 2030

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


WASHINGTON — In its quest to dominate the air battlefield of the future, the US Air Force may look to replace the traditional fighter jet with a network of integrated systems disaggregated across multiple platforms.

The Air Force on Thursday rolled out the initial findings of a team tasked last year to explore options for maintaining air superiority in the future battle space. The group, the Air Superiority 2030 Enterprise Capability Collaboration Team, found that the best path forward is developing a “family of systems” to address the range of threats in a highly contested environment.

As near-peer adversaries like Russia and China continue to close the capability gap, building long-range missiles, anti-satellite and anti-aircraft weapons designed to foil US forces’ ability to penetrate, the Air Force must find new ways to dominate the air.

"The threat environment will continue to proliferate over the next 15 to 20 years, and we will face them in places and in spaces on this globe and above this globe that we don’t even anticipate right now," said Air Superiority 2030 lead Col. Alex Grynkewich on Thursday during an event hosted by the Air Force Association.

This family of systems, or “system of systems,” approach is the Air Force’s answer to the idea the US military is losing its advantage. The new strategy will include both stand-off capability and penetrating forces, with increased dependence on space and cyber to infiltrate enemy defenses and defend our own networks, Grynkewich said.

“What the adversary has done is built a whole bunch of different systems that are networked together . . . we learned over the years it takes a network to fight a network,” Grynkewich said. “It takes a network and an integrated system of systems or a family of systems in order to handle that highly contested environment in the future.”

The Air Force set aside money in its fiscal year 2017 budget request for experimentation and prototyping in the area of air superiority, Lt. Gen. James “Mike” Holmes, deputy chief of staff for plans and requirements, said during the event. The team will use this funding to explore concepts like the arsenal plane, hypersonic weapons, directed energy, autonomy, and electronic attack, the officials said.

But will the family of systems include a traditional fighter jet? Grynkewich seems to think not.

The Air Superiority 2030 team is trying to move away from the concept of a “sixth generation fighter,” a term that has long been used to describe the follow-on to the fifth-generation F-35, Grynkewich said. Even the word “fighter” may be outdated, he noted, preferring “sensor-shooter” or “node” in a larger battle network.

“Fighters are typically short range – we’ve got to field, to be able to operate from range,” Grynkewich said. “Do you put the sensors on the platform or do you disaggregate them somewhere else? . . . It starts to look like something very different from something that we would traditionally think of as ‘sixth-gen.’”

The Air Force had planned to begin working on a joint analysis of alternatives with the Navy to explore a follow-on fighter jet solution, an F-X for the Air Force and an FA-XX for the Navy. But while the Navy went ahead with its AOA this year, the Air Force opted to delay the F-X effort, the service told reporters in February.
The one-year delay is meant to enable the Air Force to reevaluate its path forward, Holmes told reporters after the April 7 event. As it was originally envisioned, F-X would have turned into a 20 to 30-year development program, he stressed. Instead, the Air Force plans to start an AOA in January, 2017, to look at options for “what we can get short of a 20 or 30 year leap,” he said. The effort, called “Next Generation Air Dominance,” is planned to be complete by the middle of 2018, Grynkewich said.

The Air Force will work to find the most effective combination of speed and maneuverability, payload, and range for the platform, Holmes said. The right level of stealth, or low-observability, is also a factor.

As to the broader Air Superiority 2030 effort, the officials offered few concrete answers to what the force of the future will actually look like, saying there is more work to be done. Grynkewich’s team will develop a flight plan that will inform a variety of AOAs over the next few years, including Next Generation Air Dominance, Holmes said during the presentation.

Holmes’ “aspirational goal” is to have an “operationally representative configuration” of the envisioned air superiority strategy in place by 2025, he said. But, “it’s not completely in our hands,” he stressed.

Still, it is critical the Air Force move quickly in order to keep pace with the threat, the officials warned. The service should take advantage of the current push for acquisition reform in Congress and the Pentagon, Grynkewich said.
“The need for strategic agility is real,” Grynkewich stressed. “There’s an operational imperative now that we have to do this because if we don’t, we’re at risk.”
I agree that directionally, the vision need not necessarily be platform centric nor generation attributes defined. This leads to a myopic vision of the future and solutions being too bound simply by a narrowly developed pathway. We have already seen with the F-35 program, the key emphasis towards system of systems and that is likely to dominate going forward. The main problem is that traditionalist is still bound by the dog fight and maneuverability concept in a future battlespace.
 
Top