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

[Jeff Head]

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one on here that needs specs, # 2 is actually a DRONE----COUGH Cough! aaaaarrrrrggggghhhh! yes the NAVY loves drones, they prolly think Naval Aviators are prima donnas,,,, why should air ops determine the whereabouts of this lovely vessel??? notice that Navy is in proper orientation?

Yes...in the post just before yours I indicated that in fact it is not inverted but a drone. I thanked TE for the correction.

But let me say a thing or two about such drones...like this one and the UCAV being contemplated.

When a F-35 or F-XX, or F/A-18E/F can control 2-3 drones who move forward on their front door in a very stealthy manner, they will be able to perform a lot of SEAD and other supressions missions for the oncoming manned aircraft, thereby oepning the door for them to come in and do some serious business.

In a similar fashion, if similar drones are armed with A2A missiles, either BVR or close in, they can be used to either:

1) Be the forward active eyes and ears of the manned squadron to engage bandits without endgangering personnel, or,
2) Be the forward passive operators that spring deadly traps on oncoming bandits who are after the manned aircraft.

Such uses of these stealthy, well-armed UCAVs would make a huge difference in the air space.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Camouflage works when you are stationary against background . Airplanes are moving targets . As I said, by 2035 I would expect missile sensors to be equivalent of human eye and brain. If a human could discern aircraft shape moving against background, so would missile .

Moving but at a distance. and for the record the Human eye is not a great piece of optics. it can be and often is fooled even by moving objects the aim of smart camo would be to break the aircrafts silhouette which is how modern camo works. at a distance it would work that is normally beyond 2 KM's and there is already work on IR Stealth techniques.
That being said thus far there is nothing to really back active camo as part of the sixth gen fighter. There have been however uses of techniques to confuse and fool the eye.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Actually, US don't have lasers that could shoot down even basic artillery shells painted with anti-flash paint (bright white) . That is one of the reasons THEL project was shelved in favor of Iron Dome missile defense , although THEL project promised much lower cost of destroying incoming projectiles :

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

[video=youtube_share;dL9_Tldmrhs]http://youtu.be/dL9_Tldmrhs[/video]

Stealth is not bluff, but it is not panacea either . So far it was not cost effective (i.e. same job could have been done by non-stealthy planes much cheaper ) . What would happen to 5th gen stealthy planes (especially F-35) would largely influence this so called 6th generation .

Thus far only the F117 has been employed against targets is "Denied Airspace" and it worked pretty well. only once was one lost compared to similar strikes with numberless more losses.

 

[Skywatcher]

Ok, so in 2030-2040 we will have those LM and Boeing 6th gen fighters concepts, which will have combined cycle engines, adaptive/built in active stealth, direct energy weapons and advanced sensor fusion. They'll probably fly at Mach 2.0-3.5, the maximum altitude would probably be 20,000m to 25,000m.

And then we will also likely have hypersonic fighters which would fly at Mach 5+, and the altitude would probably well agove 30,000m (50+km?).

Would hypersonic fighters count as 6th gen? I know that combined cycle engines can theoretically go hypersonic, but something like the SR-72 probably won't fair very well in a WVR/DEW engagement at 15-25km altitude.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Advent is a variable cycle engine not a Combined Cycle. at this point I don't think anyone other then the Russians really feel the need for mach 3+ speeds in there fighters. in november 2013 the USAF Research Laboratory was commissioned to investigate a laser system that is believed to be for the Next Generation TACAIR.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) is requesting information describing concepts for airborne laser systems for future air dominance platforms. The emphasis of this effort is to identify potential laser systems that could be integrated into a platform that will provide air dominance in the 2030+ highly contested Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environment. Of particular interest are laser systems that are expected to be at TRL 4 or higher by October 2014 and could be demonstrated at TRL 5 or higher by 2022. Laser and beam control systems are being investigated independent of platform in the flight regime from altitudes Sea Level to 65kft and speeds from Mach 0.6 to 2.5

the official request for data means that in terms of performance the USAF is looking for something with about the same service ceiling and maybe a little faster then Raptor's official specs.

The Issue with faster is when you get to the SR71 and Mig 25/31 the turn rate is about the size of a medium sized country. Not an issue if you have a nation the size of the Russian Federation and trying to intercept bombers but that rate of turn made Iraqi Mig 25's easy targets for American F15's.

 

[thunderchief]

Moving but at a distance. and for the record the Human eye is not a great piece of optics. it can be and often is fooled even by moving objects the aim of smart camo would be to break the aircrafts silhouette which is how modern camo works. at a distance it would work that is normally beyond 2 KM's and there is already work on IR Stealth techniques.

Human eye is not great piece of optics, yet human brain could not be fooled by moving camouflaged object , no matter how good camo is . Modern sensors work better then human eye, what they lack is ability of human brain to recognize moving shape . by 2035. that is going to change

That being said thus far there is nothing to really back active camo as part of the sixth gen fighter. There have been however uses of techniques to confuse and fool the eye.

Neither of the techniques you mentioned works with moving objects, except Yehudi lights . But Yehudi lights would not work against IR sensors .

As for rocket being shoot down, it is clearly dark-painted (black perhaps ? ) and probably subsonic . AAMs are usually white and supersonic .

Thus far only the F117 has been employed against targets is "Denied Airspace" and it worked pretty well. only once was one lost compared to similar strikes with numberless more losses.

Number of sorties X quantity of ordinance dropped / number of losses . Do the math for both stealth and conventional aircraft, and you would understand

 

[Jeff Head]

As for rocket being shoot down, it is clearly dark-painted (black perhaps ? ) and probably subsonic . AAMs are usually white and supersonic.

Thunder, sometimes you tend to look at things like this like a glass as half empty. And that's fine, nothing wrong with skepticism.

Here's the deal.

The US used a high energy laser to shoot down a rocket/missile. They showed the parts of this they wanted to show. A live fire test which clearly did the number to that particular rocket. You and I have no idea what the parameters were for the coating on that rocket and other specifics.

You may want to discount the progress...substantial progress in this area. As I said, that's fine...but a half empty glass is also half full.

Do you think they are going to say, "Great...knocked that baby down, now we're done?"

Of course not. In such development you generally take baby steps and progress. They will move on from this test to others...just as they are doing with the rail gun technology.

The people involved here (and I know and have worked with some of them personally) are brilliant and not foolish. I promise you, it is very unlikely that in this area you or I know more than they do, or are coming up with bright ideas that they have not considered.

They will weaponize this technology when it is ready...and they will use various frequencies and practices to defeat what they expect will be the defenses poised against it, now and in the foreseeable future. it is not done in a vacuum, and the details are not released on the internet. They release enough to accomplish a few things:

1) To let acquisition & program mangers know that progress is being made (of course they get a lot more detail).
2) Let the US taxpayers know that they are getting something worthwhile for their money.
2) To let potential OPFORs know that progress is being made and that the US is not resting on its laurels.

Be careful about reading too much into it and picking it apart on specifics that you feel it is lacking in. They are not going to show the real capabilities in a test video like this, just enough to do the types of things I just listed.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Ok, so in 2030-2040 we will have those LM and Boeing 6th gen fighters concepts, which will have combined cycle engines, adaptive/built in active stealth, direct energy weapons and advanced sensor fusion. They'll probably fly at Mach 2.0-3.5, the maximum altitude would probably be 20,000m to 25,000m.

Everyone of these is already meant to be present on the PAKFA (except for the mach 3.5 bit). You are going to have to think up of more stuff for 6th gen.

Before you try to bite my head off about DEW, the Indian Army wants DEW on the Arjun in the next few years, so it is unrealistic to expect FGFA won't carry something similar. US is much ahead in the DEW curve.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Everyone of these is already meant to be present on the PAKFA (except for the mach 3.5 bit). You are going to have to think up of more stuff for 6th gen.

Max suspected speed for the PAK fa is probably about mach 2.5 with a 65,000 ft service sealing. for the higher speed and altitude the Russians are supposed to be working on a stealthy Mig 31 interceptor replacement. the Russians are still lacking on the DEW which the US is really looking for.

Thunder. the Human Brain is a remarkable piece of evolutionary battle kit. it the only reason a creature like us humans which lack sharp claws, suffer poor running speed, weak eye sight, poor sense of smell, a overly complex throat structure, bad teeth for ripping flesh, and a overall poor evolutionary standing for being the top of the food chain to keep an maintain such a position. The Ability of getting a computer to think like a human brain is however not something that is realistically going to let you catch all. We already have mapping software that can identify individuals with a glance based on regularities. now what your going to have is one computer looking for the patterns and another computer generating the camo. because the fighter has the same kind of sensors scanning the skies to generate the pattern and it's going to have the ability to generate a image in the same wavelengths including IR. even if the result is only a partial increase in chances of detection it's still a improvement, and despite it all chances are it will be more likely to be going against 4th and 4.5 generation platforms more then fifth generation.
as to your numbers argument keep in mind until this point the number of stealth to the number of conventional fighters has been more heavy to the conventional. as fifth generation comes on line the numbers are going to change.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Advent is a variable cycle engine not a Combined Cycle. at this point I don't think anyone other then the Russians really feel the need for mach 3+ speeds in there fighters. in november 2013 the USAF Research Laboratory was commissioned to investigate a laser system that is believed to be for the Next Generation TACAIR.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the official request for data means that in terms of performance the USAF is looking for something with about the same service ceiling and maybe a little faster then Raptor's official specs.

The Issue with faster is when you get to the SR71 and Mig 25/31 the turn rate is about the size of a medium sized country. Not an issue if you have a nation the size of the Russian Federation and trying to intercept bombers but that rate of turn made Iraqi Mig 25's easy targets for American F15's.

I might add that PAK-FA will likely retain its agility at altitude as well, although it has sacrificed L/O in order to maximize agility, so it will be much more visible to defenders radar than would be the Raptor.
The Raptor has no such limitation, it will "MAINTAIN" a 6G turn at 50,000 ft, this a quote from General Norton Schwartz, Air Force Chief of Staff, just prior to his retirement. That is one area where OVT comes into its own, and at those rarified altitudes, superior aerodynamics, flight control systems and Vectored Thrust will dominate the game, the real reason the Raptor is "worth the change", the F-35 will be very good, with very superior aerodynamics and FCS, but it will not "dominate" the taller altitudes and higher airspeeds as the Raptor will?

Was in a discussion on DT about why Russia is "reworking" all that antique hardware on the Mig-31, on the Russian Aircraft or whatever thread,,,, I haven't checked over there, but I may have been shot down in "flames"???? Feanor suggested that for whatever reason, the high altitude, high speed of the Mig is something they could put to good use against satelights or distant Awacs or Tankers??

Oh, and the very stealthy B-2 has been flown into very highly contested airspace without a scratch so far, as has the much more conventional B-1, but if I had to select a ride "downtown" it would have to be a Raptor!

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The only issues with raptor are the lack of a helmet mounted cueing system, cut backs on side scan radar and range. Advent engines would give her the legs to sip fuel in super cruise and turn and bun with Raptor. Smart skin sensors would give her the all around radar scan and she would come right from the factory with next gen helemet mounted cueing ifnot better.