USA United States Air Force

[Nilgiri]

I’ve heard some aviation experts arguing that behind civilian side lagging lays the replacement of aviation engineering philosophy with business management mentality whereas, as you pointed out, the military domain was still run by MD team which upholds engineering side.
Come to think of it, makes sense too. I mean, you don’t need really take market demands, finance, costs and what not into account. You don’t need to cut corners. You only have to be precise and meticulous to meet USAF requirements and costs are not a big deal.

Yah its long story. In the end "guns vs butter" getting lumped together as "guns AND butter" in one entity has its effects from the issue baked into "vs" to begin with.

For military ("guns" side), it has long been (in some ways since the Bronze age, but definitely in modern era even more so) premium IP frontloaded, gestated and driven to generally low production numbers and selective top-down supply-fed availability to what we call our men-at-arms.

Things (in modern era) that would just collapse under own weight if you rely on "butter" dynamics market demand, ROI and so on to pull it w.r.t the whole population (and its great differences to the men-at-arms small subset of it)....as these rely on slowly + optimally converting that premium IP to something that addresses more mundane (but obviously still important) large efficient production volumes which operates on lower margins over time (as investment + capital on this basically saturates over time) and is fundamentally oriented to civic needs and subjective preferences that govern free market.

There was an excellent paper I read 20+ years ago, that involved analysing a study that Pentagon commissioned to look into what exactly could be implemented (given top down insular "guns" side its responsible for).... from the command-economy model that USSR had at the time. But the pentagon study always basically realised the distinction and need for insularity to military domain alone.

It in many ways is same reason there is ideological training and high discipline in order to make sense of training in military (and the insularity and requirements to join and progress and so on)....compared to civilian domain where these are far less regimented.

The problem of course for USSR was it extended this kind of thing to the whole gamut of economy (GOSPLAN etc) and it basically came with great costs to what is better handled by "butter" dynamics in consumer goods etc (these do ultimately serve larger population morale, their material needs, overall supply competition to help economize supply side and so on).

i.e It is the butter side that ultimately pays for guns in the end....so there needs to be balance in the approach given relative sizes of each population and agenda.

 

[Azeri441]

This is unbelievable BREAKING NEWS that F-47 NGAD will be built by Boeing when most people were speculating LM or NG.
So POTUS Donald Trump has said -
- It will be most advanced, capable, lethal jet.
- Its prototype has been flying secretly since 5 YEARS.
- It will be superior in stealth, speed (Mach 2+, may be supercruise), payload than all current figters, nothing comes even close.
- USA's enemies will never see it coming.
- It can fly with as many drones as desired.
- The price is not revealed intentionally yet which might indicate some technologies.
His associate standing beside him added that they will have generations of air dominance for their grand kids bcoz of the technologies in it.
2 USAF generals including chief were also standing beside.
There are 2 blurred posters showcased on both his sides, by which it looks like "Bird of Prey" concept.

View attachment 74154
View attachment 74155


IDK how this jet can supercede all current jets in speed, agility, payload.
But time will tell soon now. Lots of media & documentaries will be coming.

View attachment 74156

No, most people were speculating Boeing because LM and NG already have their hands full

 

[Gessler]

So the F-47 will have canards:

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

No, most people were speculating Boeing because LM and NG already have their hands full

American citizens with their news network might have expected Boeing.
But bcoz LM won ATF & JSF programs which gave them revenue, experience, continued confidence, hence people outside West who obviously would not watch American news channels, would expect LM or NG.
If LM could manage F-22 & F-35 in 1990s then it & NG can manage at least 2 jets today also. NG has B-21, what else? What LM is busy with?

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

So the F-47 will have canards:

View attachment 74157

View attachment 74158

View attachment 74159

View attachment 74160

It appears so, yes. The posters are heavily edited to hide many things like intakes, exhausts, wings, etc.
At this time, just for fun i would say that it can have "Bird of prey" type gull-wing, much wider, the drooped tip might be movable. The canards might enable a Naval version.
Lots of excitement till the jet is actually revealed like B-21.

 

[Azeri441]

American citizens with their news network might have expected Boeing.
But bcoz LM won ATF & JSF programs which gave them revenue, experience, continued confidence, hence people outside West who obviously would not watch American news channels, would expect LM or NG.
If LM could manage F-22 & F-35 in 1990s then it & NG can manage at least 2 jets today also. NG has B-21, what else? What LM is busy with?

thats exactly why LM and NG wasn't selected, United States wants to maintain multiple producers for national security instead of relying on 1 or 2 contractors.

 

[Azeri441]

So the F-47 will have canards:

View attachment 74157

View attachment 74158

View attachment 74159

View attachment 74160

These are just artist renderings, NGAD program is changing requirements, and the final design will look vastly different

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

thats exactly why LM and NG wasn't selected, United States wants to maintain multiple producers for national security instead of relying on 1 or 2 contractors.

Well, that would be a political decision. But purely from tech PoV, LM & NG would give the best results. But in a capitaist economy, they might have demanded huge money. While Boeing has civillian market too but not LM, NG. So Boeing might have relaxed the cost. IDK Biden admin's thinking but Trump is businessman, so may be he didn't wan't to bow down to high cost quoted by LM, NG.

 

[Gessler]

These are just artist renderings, NGAD program is changing requirements, and the final design will look vastly different

No, these are official artist renders, courtesy USAF itself. There may be small changes in the production variant, but nothing major. The design is almost set in stone by this point. They've decided to go with the Penetrating Counter Air concept that they were working on all these years instead of something cheaper/lighter (which would have necessitated design change). The review concluded that PCA is the way to go.

This was the official USAF 'artist rendering' of the B-21 back when it was at a similar stage in development:

https://www.edwards.af.mil/News/Article/2683625/air-force-releases-new-b-21-raider-artist-rendering/

As you can see, it's pretty much spot on.

 

[Nilgiri]

Well, that would be a political decision. But purely from tech PoV, LM & NG would give the best results. But in a capitaist economy, they might have demanded huge money. While Boeing has civillian market too but not LM, NG. So Boeing might have relaxed the cost. IDK Biden admin's thinking but Trump is businessman, so may be he didn't wan't to bow down to high cost quoted by LM, NG.

Wasn't really a political decision, this was expected overall by simple (final) integrator capacity at hand currently (purely on military side), given what is and will occupy LM and NG capacities (NG transferred/ended large amount of their production capacity in the 90s to begin with further limiting this compared to say LM).

There is nothing precluding detailed design teams leveraging contracting to LM and NG...and then supply of components from them to Boeing as well.

Heck the F-18 was originally a Northrop (YF-17) design that McD took over and fleshed out.

Can study just the F-22 program as well. Its not "LM" purely at all.

Final integration choice is simply related to what capacity is at hand to spare from a (known/projected) lower utilisation ratio in the relevant years.

 

[Azeri441]

No, these are official artist renders, courtesy USAF itself. There may be small changes in the production variant, but nothing major. The design is almost set in stone by this point. They've decided to go with the Penetrating Counter Air concept that they were working on all these years instead of something cheaper/lighter (which would have necessitated design change). The review concluded that PCA is the way to go.

This was the official USAF 'artist rendering' of the B-21 back when it was at a similar stage in development:

View attachment 74172

https://www.edwards.af.mil/News/Article/2683625/air-force-releases-new-b-21-raider-artist-rendering/

As you can see, it's pretty much spot on.

NGAD program was put on pause in the summer for about half a year due to changing requirements

"The design concepts and requirements for NGAD are already “several years old,” Kendall explained, and new threats are evolving so quickly that those design requirements may now be outdated. NGAD was meant to replace the F-22 and intended “very much for a specific mission under a specific set of circumstances,” he noted, but the changing security landscape has not held steady, changing the calculus. "

Why the Air Force Paused NGAD—And What’s Next | Air & Space Forces Magazine

What kind of aircraft the Air Force needs, what it can afford, and how long it will be before that aircraft is available all hang in the balance.

www.airandspaceforces.com

So yes, the final prototype will most likely look very different due to changing requirements

B-21 in comparison was a smooth program and was actually ahead of schedule

 

[Nilgiri]

 

[Gessler]

NGAD program was put on pause in the summer for about half a year due to changing requirements

"The design concepts and requirements for NGAD are already “several years old,” Kendall explained, and new threats are evolving so quickly that those design requirements may now be outdated. NGAD was meant to replace the F-22 and intended “very much for a specific mission under a specific set of circumstances,” he noted, but the changing security landscape has not held steady, changing the calculus. "

Why the Air Force Paused NGAD—And What’s Next | Air & Space Forces Magazine

What kind of aircraft the Air Force needs, what it can afford, and how long it will be before that aircraft is available all hang in the balance.

www.airandspaceforces.com

So yes, the final prototype will most likely look very different due to changing requirements

B-21 in comparison was a smooth program and was actually ahead of schedule

The 'pause' has 'resumed'. The review process is over - they have concluded that NGAD in its current shape & size is indeed what's needed. That's what I'm telling you.

This was early this month:

Next Generation Fighter Critical To Future Air Superiority, Key USAF Study Concluded

We now know the key findings of a deep review of the USAF's paused Next Generation Air Dominance combat jet program.

www.twz.com

So, no big design change is expected for the NGAD going forward. What you see now is what you get for the most part.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Wasn't really a political decision, this was expected overall by simple (final) integrator capacity at hand currently (purely on military side), given what is and will occupy LM and NG capacities (NG transferred/ended large amount of their production capacity in the 90s to begin with further limiting this compared to say LM).

There is nothing precluding detailed design teams leveraging contracting to LM and NG...and then supply of components from them to Boeing as well.

Heck the F-18 was originally a Northrop (YF-17) design that McD took over and fleshed out.

Can study just the F-22 program as well. Its not "LM" purely at all.

Final integration choice is simply related to what capacity is at hand to spare from a (known/projected) lower utilisation ratio in the relevant years.

But when revenue is coming from existing projects then for new ones, facilities can be expanded. NG will be busy with B-21 but what will LM do apart from maintaining F-22 & F-35?
Do you have any interview or article by LM, USAF or Govt. directly?
Only after complete body revealing of XF-47 or its production F/A-47 version, we can say something if it is the best design so far.

 

[Nilgiri]

But when revenue is coming from existing projects then for new ones, facilities can be expanded. NG will be busy with B-21 but what will LM do apart from maintaining F-22 & F-35?
Do you have any interview or article by LM, USAF or Govt. directly?
Only after complete body revealing of XF-47 or its production F/A-47 version, we can say something if it is the best design so far.

About 1100? F-35 have been produced so far? The total order the US alone wants is about 2456 aircraft and this is expected to take till 2044 to acquire (with block upgrades along the way). This has its intersection with this 6th gen program own further RnD and production commencement....so expected relative spare capital very likely played its role in the determination (and likely played some part in NG dropping out early) compared to cost of new capital.

By 2044, the earliest F-35s will be needing replacing. So I would say LM is the favourite for winning the F-35 replacement whenever that starts as a program in the 2030s at some point. This is all part of what I meant by "rotation" earlier....it needs a look into the pertinent manufacturing facilities of each company and what they are currently and projected to be engaged with for relevant timelines.

The F-22 support/upgrade program is relatively nominal capacity footprint (essentially MRO/MLU) in comparison to full manufacturing capacity F-35 will involve for quite some time along with its support+upgrade train.

There is no interview or article regarding this stuff from direct pentagon sources. There was high secrecy and delayed release of a lot of information on the going-ons regarding selection + bid cooperation/agreement + potential and realised offset/workshare agreements between the involved companies (LM, Boeing, McD, Northrop et al) for the ATF (F-22) and JSF (F-35) programs as well.

But there is no reason to assume a totally delineated model will suddenly be switched to for this program (i.e Boeing does everything R&D wise past team lead..... and produces everything and assembles everything later). Boeing produced (by way of McD facility/heritage absorption largely) significant parts of the F-22 for example. NG produces significant parts for the F-35. Choice of final integrator becomes more nominal with time (if you want LM "skunkworks" RnD team contribution upstream to it, pay them versus your guys)....and is just increasingly related to projected spare capital vs new capital costs....as these are significant starting inertia and amortisation costs for whole production run.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

The poster model X-jet could be modified version with 2 engines, canards & different wing config yet to be fully revealed.
A public ceremony would probably reveal the production IOC version.

With such heavily edited poster, without the hidden rear half, it is difficult to say if the jet would look similar to Bird-of-Prey with canards or F/A-XX advertised so far, or combination of both.

Following is the approximate scaled comparison of Bird-of-Prey Vs F-22. For payload, fuel, range more than F-22, the actual NGAD fuselage could be roughly double BoP's fuselage.

Following is F/A-XX concept comparison with poster model: