The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fighter

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 16:50
by basher54321
The US Air Force has built and flown a mysterious full-scale prototype of its future fighter jet
Valerie Insinna
15 Sept 2020



WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force has secretly designed, built and flown at least one prototype of its enigmatic next-generation fighter jet, the service’s top acquisition official confirmed to Defense News on Sept. 14.

The development is certain to shock the defense community, which last saw the first flight of an experimental fighter during the battle for the Joint Strike Fighter contract 20 years ago. With the Air Force’s future fighter program still in its infancy, the rollout and successful first flight of a demonstrator was not expected for years.

“We’ve already built and flown a full-scale flight demonstrator in the real world, and we broke records in doing it,” Will Roper told Defense News in an exclusive interview ahead of the Air Force Association’s Air, Space and Cyber Conference. “We are ready to go and build the next-generation aircraft in a way that has never happened before.”

Almost every detail about the aircraft itself will remain a mystery due to the classification of the Next Generation Air Dominance program, the Air Force’s effort for fielding a family of connected air warfare systems that could include fighters, drones and other networked platforms in space or the cyber realm.


https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-ne ... ghter-jet/

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 17:33
by talkitron
That's a scoop if I ever saw one in the defense media. Congrats to the USAF and the unnamed contractor for being ahead of the game.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 19:24
by scudbuster
New 6th Gen Fighter. What will it look like? What new technology will it have?

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 20:31
by milosh
Hm did real thing fly or Roper is talking about simulation:
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2 ... et/168479/

Btw I doubt it will be two engine design, that would be costly and then it would need to be heavy multirole to justify cost, something which Roper don't like, he isn't fan of "jack of all trades" he want Digital century series concept which I understand is couple different cheaper machines which will be tuned for specific role, sharing propulsion and electronics.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 21:07
by knowan
milosh wrote:Hm did real thing fly or Roper is talking about simulation:
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2 ... et/168479/


“NGAD right now is designing, assembling, testing in the digital world, exploring things that would have cost time and money to wait for physical world results,” Roper said. “NGAD has come so far that the full-scale flight demonstrator has already flown in the physical world. It’s broken a lot of records in the doing.”

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 22:11
by quicksilver
“NGAD has come so far that the full-scale flight demonstrator has already flown in the physical world. It’s broken a lot of records in the doing.”

Of course, this is not the hard part (witness F-117 decades ago, and YF-22/23 and JSF X-jets some years later. How much risk was assumed in the flight — a trip around the pattern a few times w the gear down? How much flight envelope? Any mission systems capability? I wonder how the airworthiness authorities feel about all the hooyah about digital this and digital that when it comes to signing off on flight clearances.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 22:13
by jessmo112
The other part of this story is that it seems like the Chinas gravy train is over. No more easy leaps in technology via, theft and espionage.
If they want to catch us, they are going to have to work really hard on there own. Because of the Chinese we might not even see the thing until after IOC.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 22:22
by weasel1962
Never underestimate the ability to screw up like subcontracting Boeing to build it...I wonder who's going to build it...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 22:49
by jessmo112
Ok guys what are your bets on what this thing looks like.
Any takers.

1. Tails or no tails?

2. Lasers or no lasers?

3. Pilot or no pilot?

4. What engine? Does it get to advents? Or 1 massive engine.

Are we taking any bets?

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 22:57
by marauder2048
quicksilver wrote:“NGAD has come so far that the full-scale flight demonstrator has already flown in the physical world. It’s broken a lot of records in the doing.”

Of course, this is not the hard part (witness F-117 decades ago, and YF-22/23 and JSF X-jets some years later. How much risk was assumed in the flight — a trip around the pattern a few times w the gear down? How much flight envelope? Any mission systems capability? I wonder how the airworthiness authorities feel about all the hooyah about digital this and digital that when it comes to signing off on flight clearances.


And unless they've also demonstrated some DOT&E deflector shields...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 23:06
by BDF
milosh wrote:Hm did real thing fly or Roper is talking about simulation:
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2 ... et/168479/

Btw I doubt it will be two engine design, that would be costly and then it would need to be heavy multirole to justify cost, something which Roper don't like, he isn't fan of "jack of all trades" he want Digital century series concept which I understand is couple different cheaper machines which will be tuned for specific role, sharing propulsion and electronics.


I'm not so sure. Seems that the primary focus will be a airframe tailored to the high end air dominance role with focus on stand in counter air and electronic attack from extended ranges. The AF has made it fairly clear they need deeper magazines and persistence as well. Depending on the performance requirements this suggests twin engine design. This is what the defense industry reports as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see some versions being single engine however.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2020, 23:12
by BDF
jessmo112 wrote:Ok guys what are your bets on what this thing looks like.
Any takers.

1. Tails or no tails?

2. Lasers or no lasers?

3. Pilot or no pilot?

4. What engine? Does it get to advents? Or 1 massive engine.

Are we taking any bets?


My WAG:

1. Tailless. Broadband LO has been a stated objective for a while now and that's not possible with a 4 post tail design and probably not with with a V- tail design either.

2. No lasers hard kill lasers at first. Maybe in "2nd gen" NGAD

3. Optionally Manned

4. Twin engine because I'm guessing payload will be fairly large. Hard to tell what performance requirements there will be and I'm sure they've studied what the trade offs are for things such as super cruise. If that is still valuable that will probably push engine requirements towards a twin engine design.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 01:02
by jessmo112
Breaking D has some good points.
We will have to see congress on why we need a new plane and the F-35 isnt even FRP.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/sec ... 1519913251

I do like the AF and defense establishments zeal in keeping us ahead.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 03:27
by Corsair1963
My guess is this is still very much a "Demonstrator". Hell, we don't know a tenth of what the current F-35 is really capable of....


So, how can you take another generational leap beyond that???

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 03:38
by Corsair1963
Funny, no pictures or even a basic drawing???

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 03:45
by weasel1962
BDF wrote:4. Twin engine because I'm guessing payload will be fairly large. Hard to tell what performance requirements there will be and I'm sure they've studied what the trade offs are for things such as super cruise. If that is still valuable that will probably push engine requirements towards a twin engine design.


The Roper hints of "records being broken" strongly hints at this. Twin adaptive cycle engines being most likely the case.

CBO has already highlighted the following DoD plans. "CBO's projection includes purchases of 414 PCA aircraft with an average procurement cost of about $300 million each. Procurement appropriations would begin in 2028, and the first PCA aircraft would enter service in 2030."

Clearly the likelihood of a 2030 service entry date is now realistic.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 03:56
by weasel1962
Recalling now the F-35 timelines. X-35 first flight was year 2000. First lot was ordered FY 2007 for delivery year 2009 (but ended up as 2011). This seems consistent with a 2030 service entry date.

If FY 2028 1st lot procurement. This may not affect F-35A or F-15EX plans. Both will continue at projected pace with F-15EX budget moved (and supplemented) to PCA/NGAD from FY 2028 onwards so there could be 80-100 F-15EX bought by then.

It should be noted that current navy F-35 program (both B&C) will complete in FY 31 which will further provide budget for either a naval version or free up the budget for the AF. So FRP could be from FY 31 onwards...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 04:11
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:
BDF wrote:4. Twin engine because I'm guessing payload will be fairly large. Hard to tell what performance requirements there will be and I'm sure they've studied what the trade offs are for things such as super cruise. If that is still valuable that will probably push engine requirements towards a twin engine design.


The Roper hints of "records being broken" strongly hints at this. Twin adaptive cycle engines being most likely the case.


NGAP isn't supposed to start until 2022 and concludes in 2025.
And it is supposed to overlap with the tail end of AETP.

weasel1962 wrote:CBO has already highlighted the following DoD plans. "CBO's projection includes purchases of 414 PCA aircraft with an average procurement cost of about $300 million each. Procurement appropriations would begin in 2028, and the first PCA aircraft would enter service in 2030."

Clearly the likelihood of a 2030 service entry date is now realistic.



CBO did their study without consulting anyone in the AF. It's complete invention.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 04:31
by weasel1962
The sentence before the Dec 2018 CBO quote was "The Air Force has not determined the characteristics of the PCA aircraft, but the Air Force Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan indicated the need for a highly advanced air-superiority aircraft to be fielded in the early to mid-2030s.8"

The below is thus the "complete invention" that the CBO relied upon in terms of timeline. Not counting of course what was said on pg 5 of the CBO report relating to the section "How CBO Made Its Projection"

https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/ ... 20Plan.pdf

By inference also in Sep 2020, the Air Force now knows at least what they want the PCA to be as least in terms of a prototype.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 04:49
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:The sentence before the Dec 2018 CBO quote was "The Air Force has not determined the characteristics of the PCA aircraft, but the Air Force Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan indicated the need for a highly advanced air-superiority aircraft to be fielded in the early to mid-2030s.8"

The below is thus the "complete invention" that the CBO relied upon in terms of timeline. Not counting of course what was said on pg 5 of the CBO report relating to the section "How CBO Made Its Projection"

https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/ ... 20Plan.pdf



The NGAD AOA wasn't completed until 2019; CBO's "study" not only predates that but
relies on an Air Superiority plan that predates the current administration.

And CBO consulted nobody in the Air Force. Consequently, CBO's projections in terms of timelines,
quantity, capability and cost are dated, unfounded and invented.

weasel1962 wrote:By inference also in Sep 2020, the Air Force now knows at least what they want the PCA to be as least in terms of a prototype.


They've flown a full scale technology demonstrator. Not a prototype.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 07:11
by weasel1962
Its strange to argue that the 2016 air force air superiority plan is dated, unfounded and invented since the basis of NGAD starts with that plan.

More "invented" stuff. 2030 is the defining year even for the latest NGAD PB.
https://apps.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2 ... B_2021.pdf

As to the all important American definition, whilst Roper did indicate its a flight demonstrator which I don't dispute, I fail to see why it is not also a prototype which as defined in the English dictionary happens to be:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prototype
- a first full-scale and usually functional form of a new type or design of a construction (such as an airplane)

Not sure which of that definition is incorrect.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 07:50
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Its strange to argue that the 2016 air force air superiority plan is dated, unfounded and invented since the basis of NGAD starts with that plan.

More "invented" stuff. 2030 is the defining year even for the latest NGAD PB.
https://apps.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2 ... B_2021.pdf


Anything before the AoA is going to be wrong on capability, timeline, cost and quantity.
They've had a notional placeholder 2030 timeframe capability since that's when the F-22
restart study indicated the F-22 would begin to be challenged.

And the budget lines are for AS2030+ which is nice and amorphous.

Go back far enough and B-21 started as the 2018 bomber.

The restart study also urged an AoA be completed by 2017.
Clearly that didn't happen. So who knows where the the timeline is now.

The F-22 restart study is an official Air Force document that CBO did not leverage at all.

weasel1962 wrote:As to the all important American definition, whilst Roper did indicate its a flight demonstrator which I don't dispute, I fail to see why it is not also a prototype which as defined in the English dictionary happens to be:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prototype
- a first full-scale and usually functional form of a new type or design of a construction (such as an airplane)

Not sure which of that definition is incorrect.


A complete irrelevancy since DOD has definitions for technology demonstrators and definitions for prototypes.
Roper is very careful with his word choice and its consistent with what Goldfein outlined last year.

Clearly, the significance is lost on the uninitiated whose first instinct is to reach for an English language dictionary.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 08:17
by weasel1962
So when does one procure planes for 2030+ air superiority? In 2040?

Just because the 2016 Air Superiority plan happens to be before 2019 doesn't invalidate it. It sets an objective for air superiority in 2030. The AoA adds detail but doesn't change the goals. Its still 2030 last I read.

Just like how people don't need to "consult" god to quote the bible (or that the bible is the lord's words). The CBO report doesn't need to consult the AF to rely upon the USAF air superiority plan. The best part is the CBO gets access to the classified version of the plan. Have you seen it?

I don't treat the FY 2028 procurement/2030 in service dates as gospel but from what I see, it ties in neatly with many other timelines as stated. Sure, it could be earlier than 2030 but the USAF/DoD will have to do better than the F-35 or the F-22 to achieve that. YF-22 first flight was in 1990. Lot 1 was year 2000?

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 08:28
by weasel1962
marauder2048 wrote:A complete irrelevancy since DOD has definitions for technology demonstrators and definitions for prototypes. Roper is very careful with his word choice and its consistent with what Goldfein outlined last year.

Clearly, the significance is lost on the uninitiated whose first instinct is to reach for an English language dictionary.


Really, where? Don't see it here or is this one of those "invented" dictionaries...
https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Document ... 073638-727

Don't see it in the air force glossary either but guess what...
https://www.doctrine.af.mil/Portals/61/ ... SARY-O.pdf

The Air Force Glossary contains terms and definitions that are unique to the US Air Force and not found in the Department of Defense (DOD) Dictionary. If a term is not contained in this glossary, then check the DOD Dictionaryfor standard DOD terms. Ultimately, the AF Glossary and DOD Dictionary are a supplement to common English-language dictionaries.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 08:30
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:So when does one procure planes for 2030+ air superiority? In 2040?


The 2018 bomber is being procured in the 2020s. Thanks for playing.

weasel1962 wrote:Just because the 2016 Air Superiority plan happens to be before 2019 doesn't invalidate it. It sets an objective for air superiority in 2030. The AoA adds detail but doesn't change the goals. Its still 2030 last I read.


If the AoA approach is a family of systems approach vs. single material solution approach
it radically changes things and would tend to invalidate all of CBO's assumptions.

And from what Roper has said, it sounds like he discarded all of the ECCT, 2030 flight plan
stuff.

Although Pentagon and Air Force planners have been thoroughly analyzing requirements for future air dominance technology since 2015, Roper says the NGAD program is not ready to move beyond the realm of internal studies and into the acquisition phase. Despite a two-year study by the Air Superiority 2030 Enterprise Capability Collaboration Team (ECCT), followed by an extended, two-year Analysis of Alternatives, Roper still is not satisfied that the Air Force has settled on the right strategy.

“I have a strong opinion that we need to not have it devolve into a traditional program,” Roper told reporters at the Air Force Association-sponsored symposium.

The acquisition process that Roper inherited starts with a highly detailed analysis of the operating environment, which, in the case of NGAD, is set to begin at least a decade into the future. The military’s operational planners then craft an intricate set of requirements for a future weapon system based on those analytical conclusions. But Roper calls that process “naive.” The Air Force's acquisition chief wants to steer the Next-Generation Air Dominance program away from a traditional approach, such as Boeing's concept for a tailless supersonic fighter.


weasel1962 wrote:Just like how people don't need to "consult" god to quote the bible (or that the bible is the lord's words). The CBO report doesn't need to consult the AF to rely upon the USAF air superiority plan. The best part is the CBO gets access to the classified version of the plan. Have you seen it?


Where does CBO indicate they relied on classified documents?

I mean why would you have detailed discussions with program managers and analysts who are willing
to provide more data and insight than they would ever put in nebulous documents for a pre-Milestone A program?


weasel1962 wrote:I don't treat the FY 2028 procurement/2030 in service dates as gospel but from what I see, it ties in neatly with many other timelines as stated. Sure, it could be earlier than 2030 but the USAF/DoD will have to do better than the F-35 or the F-22 to achieve that. YF-22 first flight was in 1990. Lot 1 was year 2000?


LRIP was authorized in 2001.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 08:33
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:A complete irrelevancy since DOD has definitions for technology demonstrators and definitions for prototypes. Roper is very careful with his word choice and its consistent with what Goldfein outlined last year.

Clearly, the significance is lost on the uninitiated whose first instinct is to reach for an English language dictionary.


Really, where? Don't see it here or is this one of those "invented" dictionaries...
https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Document ... 073638-727


Cites a dictionary that has absolutely nothing to do with DOD acquisition or RDT&E terms...

Stop it.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 09:08
by weasel1962
marauder2048 wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:So when does one procure planes for 2030+ air superiority? In 2040?


The 2018 bomber is being procured in the 2020s. Thanks for playing.


Don't quite see the point you are making.
https://history.defense.gov/Portals/70/ ... 111017-150

The 2006 QDR stated an objective to field the next gen bomber by 2018. They are 2 years late. Doesn't invalidate the QDR. Lot 1 of F-35 was delivered 2 years late. Besides all the initial hoo-ha that entailed, eventually the program is now on track.

Can the NGAD be late by 2 years, sure. If that happens, all I can see is 2 more years of F-15EXs. Not exactly the end of the world stuff.

I'm not sure why CBO needs to state whether their version of the air sup plan was classified or not? What they did state is they relied on it. I'm not the one making the contention that the CBO took all those data out of thin air, without even knowing what the CBO relied upon....I think the CBO criticism thus far has no logic.

p.s. The YF-22 was both labelled as flight demonstrator & prototype by virtually almost every agency.

I agree there is no value add in arguing this further and will leave this as my final word on the CBO numbers.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 09:28
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:So when does one procure planes for 2030+ air superiority? In 2040?


The 2018 bomber is being procured in the 2020s. Thanks for playing.


Don't quite see the point you are making.
https://history.defense.gov/Portals/70/ ... 111017-150

The 2006 QDR stated an objective to field the next gen bomber by 2018. They are 2 years late.


This bomber won't field until the "mid 2020s" in conventional capability only and won't be nuclear capable
until maybe 2030. That's a far cry from the 2018 bomber goals. Stop moving goal posts.

Or: you don't understand that "fields" means "IOC." Guess that wasn't in m-w.com


weasel1962 wrote:I'm not sure why CBO needs to state whether their version of the air sup plan was classified or not? What they did state is they relied on it.


The F-22 restart study indicated what data was classified and what data wasn't. It has an actual bibliography.
That's what an analysis looks like. CBO indicates that it relied on official statements, cites unclassified
documents and does not indicate that it relied on classified documents.

IOW, it's not a serious study.

weasel1962 wrote:I'm not the one making the contention that the CBO took all those data out of thin air, without even knowing what the CBO relied upon....I think the CBO criticism thus far has no logic.


That CBO study talks about a F-22 with F-35 avionics but gives no color whatsoever. No numbers.
Nothing. Yet, that was precisely the configuration that the F-22 restart study looked at in detail!

You presented a deeply flawed source and have meandered through one feeble defense after another.
It predates the AoA lead by someone who has indicated he's all but discarding what came before
from the ECCT.

The CBO report is useless on several fronts.

weasel1962 wrote:
p.s. The YF-22 was both labelled as flight demonstrator & prototype by virtually almost every agency.


Translation: you still don't comprehend the difference.
But your google skills didn't permit you to find a non-irrelevant dictionary.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 13:28
by knowan
jessmo112 wrote:2. Lasers or no lasers?


I suspect at least provisions for a laser; by the time this plane enters production, there is a strong possibility of lasers having advanced enough for use by tactical aircraft.

Existing aircraft will likely be adapted first to carry lasers in external pods, but one of the definitions of 6th generation aircraft may be lasers carried internally.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 14:36
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Directed Energy weapons at least. More to DE than just lasers.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 15:50
by jetblast16
“We’ve already built and flown a full-scale flight demonstrator in the real world, and we broke records in doing it,” Will Roper told Defense News in an exclusive interview ahead of the Air Force Association’s Air, Space and Cyber Conference.


Oh do tell, Mr. Roper, DO tell LOL..

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 16:29
by sprstdlyscottsmn
broke records for "concept development to first flight for jet aircraft" or something along those lines most likely.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 16:39
by mixelflick
It sounds like more than just a demonstrator, which are typically sub scale designs. He went out of his way to say it's a full scale aircraft, and also that they've already "broken records" with it. I took that to mean it went from blueprint to a airworthy vehicle and FAST. Of course, it could be that it also set kinematic records, but that's unlikely. Pushing a prototype that hard doesn't really make much sense.

So good to see USAF finally building a dedicated air superiority machine again. This probably explains why the Russians decided to accelerate their SU-57 program, and "Hunter" drone too. This will put the heat on China to spend even more on an aircraft in the same class. I don't know how much $ they have over there, but it's possible they spend themselves into oblivion like the former Soviets and... collapse?

Anyway, this thing married to the AIM-260 and other things they're working on is going to be scary. Hopefully, they don't repeat the F-22 program's error and build enough of them this time...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 16:48
by jetblast16
I agree with your sentiments about "records"; probably more along the lines of rapid prototyping, etc. The secrecy of the program doubtless stemming from Chinese and Russian eavesdropping..

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 17:05
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:So good to see USAF finally building a dedicated air superiority machine again. This probably explains why the Russians decided to accelerate their SU-57 program, and "Hunter" drone too. This will put the heat on China to spend even more on an aircraft in the same class. I don't know how much $ they have over there, but it's possible they spend themselves into oblivion like the former Soviets and... collapse?


You are kidding right?

USSR spend around 10% of GDP on military. PRC spend at max something like 2.5%. This is US think tank estimates, official they spend something 1.7%, so lets meet at middle.

With ~2% they spend they are doing quite fine. Look for example PLAAN growth.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 17:20
by marauder2048
mixelflick wrote:It sounds like more than just a demonstrator, which are typically sub scale designs.


YF-22, YF-23, X-32 and X-35 were all full scale demonstrators.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 17:49
by mixelflick
marauder2048 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:It sounds like more than just a demonstrator, which are typically sub scale designs.


YF-22, YF-23, X-32 and X-35 were all full scale demonstrators.


I don't want to belabor the point, but this may be helpful to us in properly referencing...

The 'Y' in YF stands for prototype according to the Tri-Service aircraft designation system*. The 'F' stands for fighter, so YF stands for prototype-Fighter. These aircraft are operated by the US Department of Defense (USAF or USN).

For example, YF-22 is the prototype (technology demonstrator) version of the F-22 Raptor.

The 'X' series is the name given for strictly experimental aircraft; i.e. they are not prototypes.


*http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/afji16-401.pdf

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 17:57
by marauder2048
mixelflick wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:It sounds like more than just a demonstrator, which are typically sub scale designs.


YF-22, YF-23, X-32 and X-35 were all full scale demonstrators.


I don't want to belabor the point, but this may be helpful to us in properly referencing...

The 'Y' in YF stands for prototype according to the Tri-Service aircraft designation system*. The 'F' stands for fighter, so YF stands for prototype-Fighter. These aircraft are operated by the US Department of Defense (USAF or USN).

For example, YF-22 is the prototype (technology demonstrator) version of the F-22 Raptor.

The 'X' series is the name given for strictly experimental aircraft; i.e. they are not prototypes.


*http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/afji16-401.pdf


Roper labeled the current effort a full scale demonstrator. YF-22, YF-23, X-32 and X-35 were full scale demonstrators.
The US had played fast and loose with the designation system over the years. There have been X-planes that were
full scale procurement programs ex: X-16. And some X-planes aren't under DOD auspices.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 18:10
by tank-top
My bet is on a F-22 variant, possibly printed airframe (just making that up). With the Air Force already squeezed it would make sense that ground support is already somewhat in place. The F-22 with F-35 avionics and modern RAM coatings would be the most plausible rather than something from scratch.

Second plausibility is an air dominance version of the B-21 raider as an F-21... already broken records for LO and endurance (I’m assuming it’s already flown). We have dogfighters, why not medium long range fighter with stand off air to air weapons?

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 20:28
by juretrn
What tech could this have demonstrated?
Could the next-gen engines (AETP?) be anywhere close to such a milestone?

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 20:49
by marauder2048
juretrn wrote:What tech could this have demonstrated?
Could the next-gen engines (AETP?) be anywhere close to such a milestone?


Novel control effectors for tailless, high AoA transonic or supersonic maneuvering?

The AETP/NGAP timelines don't suggest they'd be mature enough for inclusion at this point.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 21:48
by weasel1962
juretrn wrote:What tech could this have demonstrated?
Could the next-gen engines (AETP?) be anywhere close to such a milestone?


It might be useful to recall that both GE and PW were each given $billion contract to build aetp engines on Jun 30, 2016. The contracts are due to be completed by Sep 2021.

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contra ... le/822083/

Even if the prototypes aren't equipped with these, the production ones will likely be.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 22:02
by jessmo112
weasel1962 wrote:
BDF wrote:4. Twin engine because I'm guessing payload will be fairly large. Hard to tell what performance requirements there will be and I'm sure they've studied what the trade offs are for things such as super cruise. If that is still valuable that will probably push engine requirements towards a twin engine design.


The Roper hints of "records being broken" strongly hints at this. Twin adaptive cycle engines being most likely the case.

CBO has already highlighted the following DoD plans. "CBO's projection includes purchases of 414 PCA aircraft with an average procurement cost of about $300 million each. Procurement appropriations would begin in 2028, and the first PCA aircraft would enter service in 2030."

Clearly the likelihood of a 2030 service entry date is now realistic.


Will someone tell the Boys in the office of the Navy how it will benefit all parties if the Navy and AF used the same airframe! If we could get a Navy order for 200+ it could bring the price down significantly.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 22:05
by weasel1962
I think 6G may not be restricted to just hardware improvements. Even Chinese 6G are hinting at the use of AI. I suspect AI may be a feature of new 6G fighters, supplementing 6G pilots.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 22:53
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:
juretrn wrote:What tech could this have demonstrated?
Could the next-gen engines (AETP?) be anywhere close to such a milestone?


It might be useful to recall that both GE and PW were each given $billion contract to build aetp engines on Jun 30, 2016. The contracts are due to be completed by Sep 2021.

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contra ... le/822083/

Even if the prototypes aren't equipped with these, the production ones will likely be.


ATEP is exclusively an F135/F-35A compatible engine; it won't be finished until 2022.
There are, by definition, no production versions of technology demonstrators.

NGAD doesn't even have an approved acquisition strategy; Pratt and GE won't finish with
NGAP prelim work until 2022 and there won't be an assessment of the full scale engines until 2025.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 23:02
by weasel1962
See last para.
https://www.defensenews.com/training-si ... ine-stage/

There's a whole slew of docs over the years. AETP will drive NGAD/PCA.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 23:08
by marauder2048


Feel free to look at the FBO solicitation rather than regurgitating some journalist's understanding.
AETP is a very specific F-35/F135 flight envelope, F-35 (mostly) SWAP-C compliant effort.

NGAP will leverage from that but it is its own program with its own capabilities, deliverables
and timelines. Which makes sense as NGAD might be a very different flight envelope and entail
some very different integration challenges.

Consider that the third stream usage in the F-35 will, after flow holding, mainly be used for
cooling whereas for NGAD is could be powered lift augmentation or fluidic thrust vectoring etc.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2020, 23:51
by weasel1962
Deputy Asst Secretary, USAF. See slide 8. Same was posted on the engines of innovation thread a while back.
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovclou ... tanley.pdf

AETP has 3 tracks including 1 for AS2030. Even budget docs (RDTE vol 2) states the same. I checked the FBO data and nowhere did I read it was only for F-35 only. Not sure where the impression was given but I haven't seen any links or docs provided by marauder so sauce please.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 00:26
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Deputy Asst Secretary, USAF. See slide 8. Same was posted on the engines of innovation thread a while back.
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovclou ... tanley.pdf


Oh a slide. Right. I mean why consult the FY2021 budget documents or the relevant RFIs when we have pretty pictures.

weasel1962 wrote:AETP has 3 tracks including 1 for AS2030. Even budget docs (RDTE vol 2) states the same. I checked the FBO data and nowhere did I read it was only for F-35 only. Not sure where the impression was given but I haven't seen any links or docs provided by marauder so sauce please.


You failed to demonstrate the ability to post a non-stupid taxonomic basis for DOD acquisition terms.
There's only so much hand holding I can do for you.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 00:33
by weasel1962
So I see its back to "invented" terminologies and no "sauce". lol. noted.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 00:34
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:So I see its back to "invented" terminologies and no "sauce". lol. noted.


Congratulations on being stupid. We've gone through this before where I lead you down the path
of your own destruction. I commend you on being impervious to "learnings."

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 00:50
by weasel1962
We see an unattributed paragraph with no context, which was written by.....

The worst part is like someone interpreting that sentence like saying SDB's design target carriage vehicle is the F-15E which means that every other aircraft won't carry it.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 00:56
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:We see a unattributed paragraph which was written by.....


I see someone doubling down on stupid. Of course, the context.
Like there's any possible context for the above that would make you less wrong.

It was written by the people who run the program.

"Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP) Q&A" 17 Oct 2014.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 01:00
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:We see an unattributed paragraph with no context, which was written by.....

The worst part is like someone interpreting that sentence like saying SDB's design target carriage vehicle is the F-15E which means that every other aircraft won't carry it.


Because a 285 lb small glide weapon is quite comparable to a variable cycle propulsion system that requires
many billions to mature and exquisite platform integration.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 01:01
by weasel1962
lol, going to back to "sauce". Firstly, this is an industry Q&A which is generally meaningless dribble.

Secondly this is written in 2014. Q1 clearly states "The final AETP acquisition strategy has not yet been approved, ". Clearly after all that hoo-ha about pre-2019....

Suddenly this becomes gospel even though its clearly misinterpreted.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 01:06
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:lol, going to back to "sauce". Firstly, this is an industry Q&A which is generally meaningless dribble.

Secondly this is written in 2014. Q1 clearly states "The final AETP acquisition strategy has not yet been approved, ". Clearly after all that hoo-ha about pre-2019....

Suddenly this becomes gospel even though its clearly misinterpreted.


Meaningless dribble? If you mislead industry there's huge grounds for a GAO protest. It's definitive and
consistent with NGAP being a separate propulsion program that's just coincidentally ramping up when
AETP is ramping down.

AETP is one element of a Next Generation Propulsion Campaign.


How is that open to misinterpretation?

AETP will focus on maturation/risk reduction of adaptive engine technology through design/build/test of multiple engines. The design target vehicle for this activity will be the F-35A because it has existing, well-defined requirements, installation constraints, and a performance baseline.


How is that open to misinterpretation?

And here's the finalized acquisition strategy:

For Adaptive Engine Transition Program, the Air Force has awarded two limited source, cost plus incentive fee contracts to General Electric and Pratt & Whitney due to their unique qualifications to design a high performance, flight-weight adaptive turbine engine in the thrust class for AETP. Incentive categories include engine weight, performance factors, and maintainability and supportability, with specific metrics for each area incentivized. The government agency
responsible for managing this program is the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Propulsion Directorate, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.


Happy? An acquisition strategy for a tech transition program is about who to fund and in what quantity.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 01:12
by weasel1962
I have no interest in arguing claims that final contracts will always follow what was originally communicated pre-solicitation. I think this is going nowhere and will merely maintain my stand that adaptive cycle engines developed under AETP will drive NGAD/PCA.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 01:19
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:I have no interest in arguing claims that final contracts will always follow what was originally communicated pre-solicitation. I think this is going nowhere and will merely maintain my stand that adaptive cycle engines developed under AETP will drive NGAD/PCA.


Because my evidence is overwhelming, consistent, logical and impeccably sourced.

It is not amenable to misinterpretation or decontextualization.

I'm sorry if that upsets you.

But all you have to the contrary is some bizarrely stupid argument that the AF completely revamped their entire
next generation propulsion approach in between Industry Q&A and contract award.

Since you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this claim I would encourage you to stop
making utterly unfounded, irrational and just plain silly arguments.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 02:37
by weasel1962
Source: Jeff H Stanley - Deputy Asst Secretary, USAF
USAF .jpg


TMRR = Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
EMD = Engineering, Manufacturing and Development

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 02:50
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Source: Jeff H Stanley - Deputy Asst Secretary, USAF

TMRR = Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
EMD = Engineering, Manufacturing and Development


Yes. AETP is a direct upgrade for the F135.

IT. IS. IN. THAT. FIGURE.


There would need to be an EMD effort, aka. a formal acquisition program to procure those
engines for the F-35 Block whatever.


That's entirely consistent with the Industry Q&A and absolutely contradicts what you've said.

There would also need to be (and there is) another dedicated TMRR and then an EMD effort to get an
adaptive engine for NGAD. It's called NGAP. It's many billions. It's in the FY2021 budget document.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 03:21
by weasel1962
This portion has nothing to do with the F-35 whatsoever
USAF (zoom).jpg


Both GE & PW were awarded $437m contract mods each in Jul 2018 for the adaptive cycle engine of which there were ZERO mention of any F-35.

https://www.geaviation.com/press-releas ... cle-engine
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 09605.html

Whilst some people may believe the 2014 Industry Q&A applies to this as well....I don't.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 04:18
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:This portion has nothing to do with the F-35 whatsoever

Both GE & PW were awarded $437m contract mods each in Jul 2018 for the adaptive cycle engine of which there were ZERO mention of any F-35.

https://www.geaviation.com/press-releas ... cle-engine
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 09605.html

Whilst some people may believe the 2014 Industry Q&A applies to this as well....I don't.


You can't even comprehend the contract you cited:

The contract modification is for the execution of next generation adaptive propulsion
risk reduction for potential air superiority applications.


aka *NGAP*

Yes. Those awards were the separate TMRR awards that have become NGAP. It's clearly spelled out in the
Fy2021 Budget document. And you can trace the contracts back to that effort.

It is a separate effort from AETP with a separate budget line with separate timelines, and deliverables.

You can't even comprehend your own figure.

If AETP was directly intended for NGAD why would they need another TMRR effort for it?
Because AETP is intended as a drop in replacement for the F135. That's why JPO could begin an
EMD effort *DIRECTLY* without TMRR.

NGAD cannot. That's why they have NGAP.

ALL OF WHICH GOES BACK TO THE INDUSTRY Q&A which states:

AETP is one element of a Next Generation Propulsion Campaign

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 08:58
by weasel1962
Pre-FY 2021, weren't all those monies incl for the FY 2018 contract mod funded under AETP? Last I heard, a contract mod is still part of the original contract.

Suddenly the budget split in FY 2021 is used to wag the dog by claiming it reflects the original intent? I'd say more to protect budgets just because of the risk of a budget cut.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 15:51
by jetblast16
Looks like some are building their own "Next Gen Fighter" here :roll:

Perhaps Mr. Roper wasn't jesting when he was talking about the possibility of a new "Century Series" approach to building fighter planes.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 19:19
by jessmo112
You can tell its a good aviation news day, when the forum gets a good old fashioned aviation geek bar fight.
Its been pretty quiet lately.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 19:53
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Pre-FY 2021, weren't all those monies incl for the FY 2018 contract mod funded under AETP? Last I heard, a contract mod is still part of the original contract.

Suddenly the budget split in FY 2021 is used to wag the dog by claiming it reflects the original intent? I'd say more to protect budgets just because of the risk of a budget cut.


The reason they did NGAP under a contract mod was sheer convenience. But they explicitly called
out what that mod was for: it was not for the 45,000 lb thrust engine that AETP is developing for the F-35A.

Feel free to explain away why the 2018 contract was for "next generation adaptive propulsion
risk reduction." Why would you need another risk reduction on a risk reduction contract like AETP?

Feel free to explain away the different timelines and deliverables.

Feel free to explain away the industry Q&A and absolutely everything that's been revealed about
XA100 and XA101.

Congress said that the Air Force had to explicitly break out what was for AETP and what was for NGAP rather
than having everything under "Advanced Engine Development"

It's clear that since 2014:

AETP is one TMRR with the design target vehicle of the F-35A.

NGAP is another TMRR with the design target vehicle of whatever NGAD is.

If you want backfits for the F-16 or F-22 etc that would be yet another TMRR effort.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2020, 20:27
by marauder2048
jessmo112 wrote:You can tell its a good aviation news day, when the forum gets a good old fashioned aviation geek bar fight.
Its been pretty quiet lately.


It's more of a massacre than a fight.

I've never seen someone vomit up the most bizarro world, reality distorting explanations in
an attempt to defeat primary source documents. Including RFP clarifications communicated to industry
that have a binding Federal Acquisition Regulation quality on which many a GAO protest has been sustained.

And of course those clarifications are borne out by all of the contract types awarded to date
(a different risk reduction for a different named effort) and confirmed by the FY2021 budget
(not to mention everything P&W, GE and the Air Force have said about XA100 and XA101), which
has NGAP and AETP as separate efforts. Because they always were.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 02:06
by weasel1962
lol. I am not the one ignoring inconvenient facts no do I need to resort to attacks to distract. Rather I would choose in this case make my points thru the provision of documentation to maintain the following facts:

1) The new next gen flight demonstrator is a prototype. This is proven by definition.
2) The AETP (he misspelled it as ATEP) was not exclusively an F135/F-35A compatible engine as marauder claimed.

a) The NGAP program was reflected as a new program element under AETP in FY 2019. This is factual per FY 19/20 budget docs as the doc states "this is an administrative alignment only and not a new start"

FY20_PB_RDTE_Vol-II pg 185-190.pdf
(1.23 MiB) Downloaded 20 times


This is conveniently ignored despite being highlighted.

b) This is also supported by Jeff Stanley's presentation which clearly reflects AETP on a 3 track approach.

This has not been directly disputed. This clearly showed that the USAF regarded NGAP as part of AETP which is consistent with budget documents in FY 19 & 20.

c) The contract mod which occurred in FY 2018 is part of the original contract

This is conveniently ignored despite being highlighted. If the Industry Q&A applies, then how does one explain the contract now includes NGAP which is clearly NOT for the F-35?

d) The FY 21 budget documents does not reflect how the 3rd track will be managed. If still under AETP, it does not validate that the AETP is an exclusively F-35 compatible engine effort.

P.s. to avoid others trying to put a false spin on what I'm stating, I'm not claiming the NGAP track is the same as the F-35 AETP track. Imho, the difficulty some have in understanding the original 3 track approach clearly justifies why the DoD now chooses to reflect NGAP separately.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 02:43
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:1) The new next gen flight demonstrator is a prototype. This is proven by definition.


You've yet to furnish a definition despite some really stupid m-w.com and other linkage to irrelevancies.
Here's a hint: a prototype in DOD parlance can have residual operational utility and be subject to operational testing.
A technology demonstrator has none and cannot be subject to operational testing.

weasel1962 wrote:2) The AETP (he misspelled it as ATEP) was not exclusively an F135/F-35A compatible engine as marauder claimed.


It's exclusively an F-35A engine as reflected by the original solicitation, the industry Q&A and the award for

“multiple complete, flight-weight centerline, 45,000-pounds thrust turbofan adaptive engines.”

That's consistent with an F135 drop-in replacement. It's consistent with XA100 and XA101.
It's consistent with JPO's consideration for propulsion upgrade.

weasel1962 wrote:a) The NGAP program was reflected as a new program element under AETP in FY 2019. This is factual per FY 19/20 budget docs as the doc states "this is an administrative alignment only and not a new start"


If you'd bother to read the 2018 contracts you cited, the NGAP risk reduction was awarded using FY18 funds. Ergo the FY19 budget document is irrelevant.


weasel1962 wrote:b) This is also supported by Jeff Stanley's presentation which clearly reflects AETP on a 3 track approach.

This has not been directly disputed. This clearly showed that the USAF regarded NGAP as part of AETP which is consistent with budget documents in FY 19 & 20.


First of all, DOD doesn't submit PowerPoints to Congress as binding budgetary collateral nor are PowerPoints FAR binding
in a GAO protest sense. They are for illustration only.

You conveniently ignored the TMRR effort for NGAD..that's NGAP. It's separate and distinct from AETP.


weasel1962 wrote:c) The contract mod which occurred in FY 2018 is part of the original contract

This is conveniently ignored despite being highlighted. If the Industry Q&A applies, then how does one explain the contract now includes NGAP which is clearly NOT for the F-35?


It's all under the *same* program element "advanced engine development." And subsequently broken-out
for better transparency and called out explicitly as a separate and distinct risk reduction effort.


weasel1962 wrote:d) The FY 21 budget documents does not reflect how the 3rd track will be managed. If still under AETP, it does not validate that the AETP is an exclusively F-35 compatible engine effort.


It does actually; there's a separate NGAP program management support contract.
Why would that be necessary along with an AETP program management support contract if they are the same effort?

Answer: They are not. They never were. That's consistent with the original RFI and all the guidance the Air Force
was providing to industry.

What's on FBO represents collateral for FAR contracting. It gets referenced in GAO protests as binding.
GAO does not reference PowerPoints as evidence of anything.


weasel1962 wrote:P.s. to avoid others trying to put a false spin on what I'm stating, I'm not claiming the NGAP track is the same as the F-35 AETP track. Imho, the difficulty some have in understanding the original 3 track approach clearly justifies why the DoD now chooses to reflect NGAP separately.


AETP was never (per the industry Q&A) a three track approach. AETP was the first track under a three track approach
for next generation propulsion. NGAP is the second track. There may never be a third track.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 03:00
by weasel1962
What is being argued is the equivalent of arguing the F-35B is not an F-35 because it is different from the F-35A.

The arguments on the 2016 contract (based on the 2014 industry Q&A) has the same analogy as stating the F-35A production contract means the F-35B is not an F-35. In the same way, just because the original contract was for the F-35A doesn't exclude the NGAP effort from being under AETP.

The Industry Q&A clearly is not relevant for the contract mod. Its a fact. Nothing new has been presented.

If the FY 2019/20 budget docs is not relevant for an FY2018 contract mod, being funded in FY 2018, so where is that reflected in the FY2018 budget? Isn't that reflected under AETP?

There is a simple reason why everything fell originally under AETP. Like the F-35, its about shared technology and commonality. There is no basis nor documentation that reflects otherwise.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 04:46
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:What is being argued is the equivalent of arguing the F-35B is not an F-35 because it is different from the F-35A.

Feel free to grasp the difference between different and distinct TMRR contract under a single program element, run by the same program office in the same service and a giant, formal acquisition program with split RDT&E, EMD and split procurement.

One of these things is not like the other.

weasel1962 wrote:The arguments on the 2016 contract (based on the 2014 industry Q&A) has the same analogy as stating the F-35A production contract means the F-35B is not an F-35. In the same way, just because the original contract was for the F-35A doesn't exclude the NGAP effort from being under AETP.


Please grasp what TMRR contracts and tech transition efforts are all about.

weasel1962 wrote:The Industry Q&A clearly is not relevant for the contract mod. Its a fact. Nothing new has been presented.


What level of Next Generation content will be included within AETP?
AETP is one element of a Next Generation Propulsion Campaign. AETP will focus on maturation/risk reduction of adaptive engine technology through design/build/test of multiple engines. The design target vehicle for this activity will be the F-35A because it has existing, well-defined requirements, installation constraints, and a performance baseline.


So what are the other elements? It's been six years. Can you tell us?
I can: it's NGAP.

There's absolutely nothing in AETP for anything follow-on beyond trade studies. Not a formal TMRR effort.
But a formal TMRR effort is mentioned in your beloved slide. You've avoided talking about it.


weasel1962 wrote:
If the FY 2019/20 budget docs is not relevant for an FY2018 contract mod, being funded in FY 2018, so where is that reflected in the FY2018 budget? Isn't that reflected under AETP?


It's reflected under the same program element "advanced engine development"; that's how they do traceability.

weasel1962 wrote:There is a simple reason why everything fell originally under AETP. Like the F-35, its about shared technology and commonality. There is no basis nor documentation that reflects otherwise.


There's no evidence in the AETP RFI or industry Q&A or anything about sharing or commonality.
It's a nice-to-have but nowhere is it stated as a requirement.


In fact, everything is geared towards a notional 2019 EMD date and a mid 2020's production readiness timeframe.
That's only consistent with the F-35A being the target vehicle since NGAD could not and would not be ready.


That NGAP is massive seven year effort that lavishly funded should tell you that there's not much overlap.
But then there's doesn't have to be and there wouldn't be because the flight envelopes and design reqs or
different: notice the focus on supersonic radius for NGAD and nothing about that for the F-35.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 13:09
by mixelflick
Back and forth is getting old.

Can we please get on with speculating what NGAD looks like? Or where it's being flown? Or how fast it goes? Or, or, or.... anything but more arguing over AETP engines. They're out there, they're coming and they'll be in OUR fighters, not the enemy's.

That's what's really important IMO...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 15:34
by zero-one
weasel1962 wrote:The Roper hints of "records being broken" strongly hints at this. Twin adaptive cycle engines being most likely the case.


I personally have my reservations regarding the records part. Some of the best records out there like speed, time to climb and range are very steep even to this day and I doubt they could be broken within the 1st few test flights.

It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 15:43
by milosh
zero-one wrote:I personally have my reservations regarding the records part. Some of the best records out there like speed, time to climb and range are very steep even to this day and I doubt they could be broken within the 1st few test flights.

It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.


If it is two engine F135 demonstrator, super cruise records can be beaten which USAF achieved by YF-23 and F-22 later.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 18:09
by marauder2048
milosh wrote:
zero-one wrote:I personally have my reservations regarding the records part. Some of the best records out there like speed, time to climb and range are very steep even to this day and I doubt they could be broken within the 1st few test flights.

It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.


If it is two engine F135 demonstrator, super cruise records can be beaten which USAF achieved by YF-23 and F-22 later.


None of the timelines (for AETP or NGAD) in the budget documents support a demonstrator
at this stage with adaptive engines.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 20:54
by milosh
marauder2048 wrote:
milosh wrote:
zero-one wrote:I personally have my reservations regarding the records part. Some of the best records out there like speed, time to climb and range are very steep even to this day and I doubt they could be broken within the 1st few test flights.

It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.


If it is two engine F135 demonstrator, super cruise records can be beaten which USAF achieved by YF-23 and F-22 later.


None of the timelines (for AETP or NGAD) in the budget documents support a demonstrator
at this stage with adaptive engines.


I wrote two engine F135 demonstartor, no new engine.

They could use tuned F135 for example, as Russians did with 117 for Su-57, it is more less same engine as 117S in Su-35 but have better dry thurst capability.

Even if they use class F135, demonstartor would have almost 260kN of dry thrust.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2020, 21:42
by marauder2048
milosh wrote:
I wrote two engine F135 demonstartor, no new engine.

They could use tuned F135 for example, as Russians did with 117 for Su-57, it is more less same engine as 117S in Su-35 but have better dry thurst capability.

Even if they use class F135, demonstartor would have almost 260kN of dry thrust.


I don't think the F-35 program could spare two engines.
And you've blown through $25 million just on engines and engine accessories.

The Lockheed ICE aircraft was/is single engine. The last study I read on it, a master's thesis,
used a single F135.

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5350&context=masters_theses

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2020, 00:22
by disconnectedradical
zero-one wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:The Roper hints of "records being broken" strongly hints at this. Twin adaptive cycle engines being most likely the case.


I personally have my reservations regarding the records part. Some of the best records out there like speed, time to climb and range are very steep even to this day and I doubt they could be broken within the 1st few test flights.

It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.


The YF-22 and YF-23 only flew from August to December 1990, and broke records for supersonic cruise. Given this, a few months of flight testing can conceivably allow a new fighter design to accomplish a similar feat, aerodynamics and air vehicle technology has pushed well beyond what the current F-22 or F-35 can do in kinematics.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2020, 02:52
by quicksilver
“It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.“

x2

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2020, 03:18
by marauder2048
disconnectedradical wrote:
The YF-22 and YF-23 only flew from August to December 1990, and broke records for supersonic cruise.


The Dem/Val contracts had been awarded in 1986 though. Supposedly, they went from Analysis of Alternatives to
full scale flight demonstrator accomplishing test points in one year.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2020, 08:44
by citanon
quicksilver wrote:“It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.“

x2


X3 this.

Between the F-35 and the B-21 program you now have two major program leads successfully designing and building affordable, maintainable stealth aircraft and an entire common industrial base that just went on a generational upgrade in production processes and tooling. You also have all the enabling subsystem from engines to avionics ready to go. Packaging into a new form factor is comparatively easy. Why not take advantage of all those investments and churn out better adapted form factors for the Pacific theater? Looks like Roper wasn't kidding about the Century Series idea.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2020, 20:21
by charlielima223
mixelflick wrote:Back and forth is getting old.

Can we please get on with speculating what NGAD looks like? Or where it's being flown? Or how fast it goes? Or, or, or.... anything but more arguing over AETP engines. They're out there, they're coming and they'll be in OUR fighters, not the enemy's.

That's what's really important IMO...


I would make the stereotypical guess and say this thing was flown out of some highly secretive base in the middle of nowhere of Nevada. As far as how it looks...

https://theaviationist.com/2020/09/18/a ... -aircraft/

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2020, 01:12
by jetblast16
Look at the plane (in the purple rectangle I selected). Look familiar :mrgreen: ? Could it be...?
(take a look at eSeries2.png attachment)

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSGX1NAc6ZE

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2020, 03:18
by boogieman
Between this, various UAS (RQ170/GJ-11/Okhotnik) and B21/H20, air warfare seems to be turning into a contest of who has the best flying triangles :lol:

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 03:08
by jetblast16
Interesting video post date from above...Sep 14, 2020. That's one day before Will Roper's public revelation of NGAD already flying/ flown.

I don't believe in coincidence. Things happen for a reason. I'm not saying that Boeing (foolishly) revealed NGAD, but may have hinted strongly at what it actually looks like..

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 05:38
by XanderCrews
citanon wrote:
quicksilver wrote:“It could be another type of record like, time from design to production, or number of lines of software code or something. I'm not trying to douse water on the hype, but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.“

x2


X3 this.

Between the F-35 and the B-21 program you now have two major program leads successfully designing and building affordable, maintainable stealth aircraft and an entire common industrial base that just went on a generational upgrade in production processes and tooling. You also have all the enabling subsystem from engines to avionics ready to go. Packaging into a new form factor is comparatively easy. Why not take advantage of all those investments and churn out better adapted form factors for the Pacific theater? Looks like Roper wasn't kidding about the Century Series idea.


dash 4 checking in.

if you read this like a lawyer the records he is talking about don't necessarily mean flight performance, especially when this guy is basically a "development geek" and his focus is a new process and new design philosophy. I think he is referencing a timeline.

Also Marauder is correct. and the CBO has a ridiculously bad track record with military development programs.

lastly, no Jessmo I don't want the damn Navy involved at all. you won't save any money that way I can promise you. What you'll get is an airplane thats hamstrung in all performance parameters by the need to crash land on a ship, fold up, and get shot off the front. it instantly creates a "box" that the airplane must fit into (literally in some cases).

Image

one of the things they knew about the V-22 very early was exactly how big it would be. how? because the requirements instantly "spoiled" the surprise and laid out exactly how large clearances around the ship had to be.

and since one can't "sort of" land on an aircraft carrier those parameters are uncompromising and possible deal breakers. just to put things in perspective a Super Hornet weighs (about 14,500 kg) more than an F-15 (about 12,700 kg), while SH is still coming in 5000 kilograms under an F-14.

It had to happen eventually but you're going to get into the limits of carrier capable fighters, which is also a collision with the budget which is in competition for (and I hope you're all sitting down for this) ships and submarines and other things navies buy and need. Never forget that despite an amazing 1986 movie that is still paying dividends today, the navy is a ship force with airplanes, and not an airplane force with ships. people mix this up all the time especially aviation geeks because we tend to see the airplanes. The regular, boring, US Navy is closer to "The Enemy Below" than it is "zero dark thirty" or "Top Gun" watching regular sailors work and endlessly smoke on destroyers and frigates is boring as hell though (actually depressing in some cases), so not a lot of movies get made about them.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 06:00
by weasel1962
There's a very simple reason why it can't be "development" records. Can't beat wartime records for fighter development. If one scopes it so narrowly as to fit, it'd be totally inane. The reference is imho flight performance which can be bettered even with twin F-135s.

Whilst navy development of NGAD might not share the same level of commonality between F-35C and F-35A, I think there will still be scope for some commonality e.g. avionics, sensors, engines etc. I don't think it will be completely divorced considering the timelines.

Shared research
https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=750403

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 13:55
by mixelflick
weasel1962 wrote:There's a very simple reason why it can't be "development" records. Can't beat wartime records for fighter development. If one scopes it so narrowly as to fit, it'd be totally inane. The reference is imho flight performance which can be bettered even with twin F-135s.

Whilst navy development of NGAD might not share the same level of commonality between F-35C and F-35A, I think there will still be scope for some commonality e.g. avionics, sensors, engines etc. I don't think it will be completely divorced considering the timelines.

Shared research
https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=750403


If it is indeed a reference to flight performance, the program is further along than many here thought. Everything else (hardware, flight control software, environmental systems) would have to have been validated first. And you can't do all of it via computer simulation, it takes an airworthy vehicle. If so there's probably more than 1, and it's been flying for awhile..

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 17:33
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:There's a very simple reason why it can't be "development" records. Can't beat wartime records for fighter development.


Which was before modern flight/range safety considerations came into force or modern contracting for
TMRR. But even contract award time to the first transonic flight would be impressive under the modern regimes.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 20:05
by zero-one
weasel1962 wrote:There's a very simple reason why it can't be "development" records. Can't beat wartime records for fighter development.


It could be fastest development of a post cold war fighter in the US, or fastest development of a stealth fighter from concept to prototype. I'm not saying its impossible to be a flight performance record, but I want to keep my expectations in check,

I'm hoping its some kind of Super cruise, dash speed, time to climb, or G onset record but then it turns out to be most lines of software code for a fighter aircraft.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 20:13
by sprstdlyscottsmn
I'm expecting something along the lines of "shortest time from PDR to first flight for a military jet".

"The importance, Roper said, is that just a year after the service completed an analysis of alternatives, the Air Force has proven it can use cutting-edge advanced manufacturing techniques to build and test a virtual version of its next fighter — and then move to constructing a full-scale prototype and flying it with mission systems onboard."

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 22:15
by XanderCrews
not to take anything away but the "air vehicle" is the relatively easy part. the show stoppers have been engines and avionics development and then endless testing requirements

X-35 flew mission X in 2001, but F-35B wouldn't be IOC until 13 years later. hell they took a test F-35A to mach 1.61 and 9.9G all the way back in 2011. my point being that the early awesomeness won't necessarily translate to an overall speedy development. remember that early on JSF was considered a model program. it actually won awards before the "troubles" set in.

If they had simply sole sourced the JSF to LM with the winning STOVL Lift fan we could have saved years. but the competition was required. X-35 first hover was June 2001. You can do amazing things with short timelines and good people, the issue is the politics and the bureaucracy. DOT&E exemplifies this nearly perfectly. The sheer amount of testing and verification is now a decades long process.

:doh: :doh: :doh:

"do this slow enough you can make a career out of it"

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 22:24
by quicksilver
“Do this slow enough you can make a career out of it"

Shack. (And the bits above it about test world).

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 01:38
by element1loop
BDF wrote:I'm not so sure. Seems that the primary focus will be a airframe tailored to the high end air dominance role with focus on stand in counter air and electronic attack from extended ranges. The AF has made it fairly clear they need deeper magazines and persistence as well. Depending on the performance requirements this suggests twin engine design. This is what the defense industry reports as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see some versions being single engine however.


There's also no reason why a single can not be made with 30% larger diameter than say F-135, to flow more than double the air for 100,000 lb of thrust, with the efficiency, lighter-weight and extra fuel fraction from a highly blended single engine air-frame. If you have such an advantage in single-engine airpower (thrust, lower weight, efficiency, range, loiter, payload, larger weapon bay) you'd be crazy not to maximize those advantages over any rival still stuck with using twins.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 01:50
by element1loop
weasel1962 wrote:So when does one procure planes for 2030+ air superiority? In 2040? Just because the 2016 Air Superiority plan happens to be before 2019 doesn't invalidate it. It sets an objective for air superiority in 2030. The AoA adds detail but doesn't change the goals. Its still 2030 last I read.


What's the threat?

Seems to me the threat will be a revised, updated, re-engined and actually rebuilt J20 fleet, in 2035.

No doubt PLAAF will reply soon with blurb about it's superior 7th-gen design and its upcoming flight testing in early 2022.

The supporting propaganda video will feature an X-47B video, being passed off as PLAAF/PLAN's killer-death Ai fewcha fidah! And no one in China will even know it's a 10 year old X-47B video.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 02:00
by element1loop
mixelflick wrote:... This probably explains why the Russians decided to accelerate their SU-57 program, and "Hunter" drone too. ...


Accelerated? Where? The Su57 build is slower than a wet weak. it's even slower than a Rafale production line. The only reason it was accelerated was because the other option was to sweep it under the carpet, and call the the Su35 a 6th-gen. :mrgreen:

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 02:21
by element1loop
weasel1962 wrote: d) The FY 21 budget documents does not reflect how the 3rd track will be managed. If still under AETP, it does not validate that the AETP is an exclusively F-35 compatible engine effort.


There's no reason an F135 replacement would not be using the third stream to optimize F-135 for higher altitude, higher cruise speed performance, as indeed, that's exactly where AETP range, loiter, speed and efficiency increases would come from.

In which case the engine becomes a lot more capable than just the F-35A envelope, it would in fact substantially expand the USAF's (presumably new-build) F-35s re-certified envelope variant.

In which case the engine becomes suitable for use in other aircraft, but may not be.

In a secret fighter development program, the engine for it would be a secret as well. I expect a completely different engine for an NGAD fighter.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 02:33
by element1loop
zero-one wrote: ... but I just don't think they'll push the plane that much within the 1st few flights.


But it's just a demonstrator, there are probably several of them. The point is to quickly demonstrate its upper limits, advantages, and disadvantages. What it can really do. There have probably been scores of flights before this announcement. As there's no new fighter contracts on the line yet and its all hush-hush, no one will care if demonstrators are thrashed (early) to the point of breaking them. They'd be crazy not to push them hard early, if the point is acceleration of performance tests, and of VLO airframe tech.


EDIT: One other thing, there's been some talk of updating aircraft software in the air recently. Such rapid development needs seem to be the perfect opportunity to tweak an aircraft's flight envelope and control surface behaviors and stability, via adaptively updating flight parameter limits and timing of events, based on sensor input feedback, in real time, while flying and testing multiple areas during the course of 1 flight. Especially if optionally-unmanned for the sake of initial (i.e. including sacrificial testing) flight testing needs to be met, very rapidly. I see no reason this could not be dramatically accelerated via automation, and quickly stress-testing the result more fluidly. With telemetry and results transmitted to ground, ready for analysis within at most minutes. Revised, and uploaded from another test. If you control the airspace 100%, and the aircraft can stay aloft for 7 to 8 hours, it makes sense to accelerate the whole basic flight and performance testing in this way. There's no time gains in testing the way the F-35 was serial tested, so that's out. The testing has to be automated, and done in massive-parallel, in rapid succession, each flight.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 09:42
by marauder2048
element1loop wrote:
weasel1962 wrote: d) The FY 21 budget documents does not reflect how the 3rd track will be managed. If still under AETP, it does not validate that the AETP is an exclusively F-35 compatible engine effort.


There's no reason an F135 replacement would not be using the third stream to optimize F-135 for higher altitude, higher cruise speed performance, as indeed, that's exactly where AETP range, loiter, speed and efficiency increases would come from.

In which case the engine becomes a lot more capable than just the F-35A envelope, it would in fact substantially expand the USAF's (presumably new-build) F-35s re-certified envelope variant.


The variable cycle engine (VCE) architecture you want for flow-holding for a subsonic cruiser with supersonic dash (and some supercruise) tends to look *very* different to what you want for a supercruiser with dash; the thermal management system required for the latter (and how it interacts with the engine(s)) is far more complex.

AETP being F-35 focused is nice since that VCE is a far less challenging design point and the aircraft configuration
is not a moving target. The potential install base is demonstrably large and the overlap between the F135 and the B-21 propulsion system suggests it could be a win for both programs.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 12:24
by madrat
element1loop wrote:Accelerated? Where? The Su57 build is slower than a wet week. it's even slower than a Rafale production line. The only reason it was accelerated was because the other option was to sweep it under the carpet, and call the the Su35 a 6th-gen. :mrgreen:


fixed.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 16:15
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:
element1loop wrote:Accelerated? Where? The Su57 build is slower than a wet week. it's even slower than a Rafale production line. The only reason it was accelerated was because the other option was to sweep it under the carpet, and call the the Su35 a 6th-gen. :mrgreen:


fixed.


Yes well, perhaps "accelerated" wasn't the right term.

They have been all over the place, but quickly went from "We're building 12 of them" to, "We're building 76" for.... some reason. I don't think it was just a whim on Putin's part, something seemed to be driving it. If you follow Russian propaganda sites, other countries are supposedly ordering/thinking about ordering it all the time, LOL. How's this for desperate?

"A recent image of the country’s Defence Ministry shows Su-57 fighters operating alongside Algerian Su-30 fighters, frigates and T-90 tanks - giving considerable credibility to reports that the country is in fact planning to field the aircraft..."

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/artic ... jet-likely

So because the SU-57 showed up in what looks like wall graffiti, that means they're ordering it. Hell, you might as well say it's already flying in Algerian colors. Lately though, they've been pumping up the possibility that Iran, China, Egypt and North Korea might buy it. I don't know about those countries, but I think it'd look good in Canadian livery. Given their love of fielding 80's retro-birds though, doubtful it'll happen.

Regardless of what's driving it, their latest plans have jumped by 64 airframes. Which if you think about it, represents a nearly 7 fold increase in production! :mrgreen:

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 17:28
by wrightwing
XanderCrews wrote:not to take anything away but the "air vehicle" is the relatively easy part. the show stoppers have been engines and avionics development and then endless testing requirements

X-35 flew mission X in 2001, but F-35B wouldn't be IOC until 13 years later. hell they took a test F-35A to mach 1.61 and 9.9G all the way back in 2011. my point being that the early awesomeness won't necessarily translate to an overall speedy development. remember that early on JSF was considered a model program. it actually won awards before the "troubles" set in.


M1.67 to be more precise (at least as far as public domain is concerned.)

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 01:16
by element1loop
mixelflick wrote:Regardless of what's driving it, their latest plans have jumped by 64 airframes. Which if you think about it, represents a nearly 7 fold increase in production! :mrgreen:


Yeah, Russian plans are amazing. :mrgreen:

Image

The fact the Russains aren't building a fleet of >250 x Su57 @ 25 per year, makes it clear they're not serious.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 05:00
by Scorpion1alpha
"marauder2048", there are a couple of complaints by forum members of your behavior, particularly of you calling people "stupid" in this thread. You are hereby warned to cease that behavior as it does violate forum rules. Continuation of this behavior towards others could result in disciplinary actions against you to include banning.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 12:51
by madrat
I come here to read informative posts like marauder2048. I don't know what snowflake complained about him, but we really don't come to read their babble.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 20:04
by marauder2048
Scorpion1alpha wrote:"marauder2048", there are a couple of complaints by forum members of your behavior, particularly of you calling people "stupid" in this thread. You are hereby warned to cease that behavior as it does violate forum rules. Continuation of this behavior towards others could result in disciplinary actions against you to include banning.


I said that 'weasel1962' was "being stupid" after giving him absolutely every opportunity to backdown before I
produced irrefutable, GAO adjudicable, primary source documents that proved him completely wrong.

This has happened before with him; he was nasty, condescending and high-handed and clearly of the mind
that I was bluffing.

I wasn't; he's upset with that.

But I've never complained about his behavior.

If there are other members who were offended by my language then I apologize. It has never happened before
this incident and it will never happen again.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 01:31
by Corsair1963
marauder2048 wrote:
Scorpion1alpha wrote:"marauder2048", there are a couple of complaints by forum members of your behavior, particularly of you calling people "stupid" in this thread. You are hereby warned to cease that behavior as it does violate forum rules. Continuation of this behavior towards others could result in disciplinary actions against you to include banning.


I said that 'weasel1962' was "being stupid" after giving him absolutely every opportunity to backdown before I
produced irrefutable, GAO adjudicable, primary source documents that proved him completely wrong.

This has happened before with him; he was nasty, condescending and high-handed and clearly of the mind
that I was bluffing.

I wasn't; he's upset with that.

But I've never complained about his behavior.

If there are other members who were offended by my language then I apologize. It has never happened before
this incident and it will never happen again.


GAO like CBO Reports aren't worth the paper they're printed........(just saying)

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 17:51
by mixelflick
Of all the boards... we've got people here who's feelings are hurt over being called wrong, stupid or what have you? C'mon.. this board is above that. This PC nonsense has gone far enough - if someone is such a wilting flower they run to a mod b/c they're "offended" or their feelings are hurt - they don't belong here.

Go watch "The View" where you can blither on about your "feelings". These people need to go, they're weakening the very fabric of America...

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 01:32
by weasel1962
Don't recall making a complaint. Mixel, agreed with you pages back that its time to move on. Quite a number of interesting articles.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... jet-clues/
Some of the pics suggest its a single engined fighter so I'm keeping an open mind here.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 02:18
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Don't recall making a complaint. Mixel, agreed with you pages back that its time to move on. Quite a number of interesting articles.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... jet-clues/
Some of the pics suggest its a single engined fighter so I'm keeping an open mind here.


"interesting articles" == tertiary source of noise?

As an act of contrition, I offer that we don't want to lower the tone around here
with anything from Mizokami or Cenciotti.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 02:31
by weasel1962
Its not about the author. Its about the pics.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 02:50
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Don't recall making a complaint.


And what is this...subpoenaed testimony before the Senate?!!

Either you did or you didn't.

Please state which.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 02:52
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:Its not about the author. Its about the pics.


The pics are public domain or US Govt. works. You could just attach them.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 02:54
by weasel1962
Too many sources. Rather than posting all the various sources, the article highlights/credits all the various sources.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 03:08
by jetblast16
Y.A.W.N..

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 03:16
by weasel1962
jetblast16 wrote:Y.A.W.N..


That would be in reference to your post of one of those pics yourself...
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=53264&p=444779#p444779

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 03:33
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:
jetblast16 wrote:Y.A.W.N..


That would be in reference to your post of one of those pics yourself...
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=53264&p=444779#p444779



I'm not sure this or any of the above adds anything. The Cenciotti article cited in the article cited above
(isn't indirection fun) tries to connect these back to the "sightings" of what just about
everyone with a photo analysis background agrees is the B-2.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 03:34
by weasel1962
I agree, its not conclusive. All I'm highlighting is that not all of those pics are twin-engined. Don't think a B-2 will be single-engined.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 08:30
by marauder2048
weasel1962 wrote:I agree, its not conclusive. All I'm highlighting is that not all of those pics are twin-engined. Don't think a B-2 will be single-engined.


Fair enough. The recent Lockheed ICE based papers were modeling a single F135. It's not inconceivable the Air Force
would want to tackle tailless with a single engine first since handling asymmetric thrust due to single engine out
in a twin becomes really tricky in a tailless supersonic fighter.

I still like JMR-TD, which the Army is adamant the Budget documents is not a prototyping effort for FVL,
as a model for NGAD. But it's all guess work.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 13:15
by mixelflick
weasel1962 wrote:Don't recall making a complaint. Mixel, agreed with you pages back that its time to move on. Quite a number of interesting articles.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... jet-clues/
Some of the pics suggest its a single engined fighter so I'm keeping an open mind here.


Didn't mean it was you making the complaint, sorry if it came off that way. And agree 100% we need to get back to the issue at hand here - USAF has built/flown a full scale, Next Gen Fighter...

If they do this one right, it will have an even bigger fear factor than the F-15/22... combined. And I don't just mean in theater or in a tactical sense. All signs point to an aircraft with a strategic capability, something that fundamentally changes the game. I can't wait to see it, and it shouldn't be long now. Eventually, they'll need to expand the flight envelope so at some point - we'll get our first peek. Personally, I can't wait... :)

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 18:24
by tank-top
I am almost willing to take cash bets... everyone missed the obvious!

The new fighter is the (F)B-21 Raider, or a version of it. There could be two different variants, a fighter and a bomber but why bother? A couple AMRAAM’s and Aim-9x’s and the F-35 helmet, he’ll steal the bombing and targeting software from the F-35.

We will see

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2020, 18:29
by marauder2048
tank-top wrote:I am almost willing to take cash bets... everyone missed the obvious!

The new fighter is the (F)B-21 Raider, or a version of it. There could be two different variants, a fighter and a bomber but why bother? A couple AMRAAM’s and Aim-9x’s and the F-35 helmet, he’ll steal the bombing and targeting software from the F-35.

We will see


Given that there was no full scale demonstrator for B-21 this would be a bizarre development.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2020, 07:59
by element1loop
tank-top wrote:I am almost willing to take cash bets... everyone missed the obvious!

The new fighter is the (F)B-21 Raider, or a version of it. There could be two different variants, a fighter and a bomber but why bother? A couple AMRAAM’s and Aim-9x’s and the F-35 helmet, he’ll steal the bombing and targeting software from the F-35.

We will see


Doubt this. NGAD is very likely to be a high and fast super-cruiser, so it can cover very long distances faster than any fighter ever has (and it will need to). That will exclude a transonic VLO bomber as the basis for NGAD. I also agree with weasel that B-21 is unlikely to be a single, due to the potential for large asymmetric loads, with shallower wider bays either side of a central duct. I think it has to be a twin, with a large long central bay.

Given the efficiency, speed and range required by an air-dominance NGAD, I think it's likely this will be a large single, with a massive fuel load, plus weapon payload thus meeting the basic needs of an evolving PCA type platform in the process. I don't think a VLO B-21 missile-truck can be that.

But combine twin B-21 and single NGAD in time and space and they'll certainly rip airforces apart in the air, and on the ground, in quick order. Thus penetrating air and ground OCA of PCA is covered.

Now add a forward (single) VLO tactical tanker in support of NGAD.

USAF Discussing Larger Fighters, Weaponized KC-46, Roper Says

Steve Trimble September 23, 2020 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

… “We don’t put weapons and sensors on tankers to shoot down aircraft, but the current KC-46 is a big airplane with the ability to mount sensors and weapons under the wings,” Roper said. “We just don’t do it because we can use a fighter combat air patrol to defend high-value assets.” The Air Force also may need a different kind of tanker in the future, he said. Two options are possible: A larger aircraft than the KC-46 that could carry more fuel, but needs to stay farther away from potential threats, or much smaller, unmanned and stealthy “micro-tankers” that could operate much closer or even inside defended airspace, Roper said. “I expect that as we really look at airpower in the truly contested environment that we’ll be looking at fuel very strategically,” Roper said. …

https://sdquebec.ca/en/news/usaf-discus ... roper-says


Self-defending VLO forwards tactical tankers, with an A2A weapons bay ... full of AIM-260s ...

With that offensive penetrating force-mix in mind it makes sense that B-21 and NGAD would be contemporaneous builds, and enter service within a year or two of each other.

I expect an armed VLO drone tanker to make an appearance fairly soon-ish.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2020, 13:20
by mixelflick
Armed, VLO tanker soon? At first I thought that unlikely, but if you take into account all of the work done in the black world over the past 20 years on flying wing type aircraft... very likely we have at least a squadron or two of these for special ops.

The possibility of NGAD being single engined is IMO remote, but not impossible. When prototypes of the Flanker were photographed by spy satellites (RAM-L)?, Western intelligence thought it was single engined! Or at least, some fighter sized airframe at the Ramenskoy test facility was.

I still favor twin engines, likely F-135 derivatives with much greater thrust and fuel efficiency. Can only imagine what seeing/hearing a fighter at an airshow with 100,000lbs of thrust would be like :)

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2020, 14:20
by sprstdlyscottsmn
I don't think a large supercruiser can be a single. We are talking a plane on the order of 80,000lb.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2020, 18:23
by milosh
mixelflick wrote:The possibility of NGAD being single engined is IMO remote, but not impossible. When prototypes of the Flanker were photographed by spy satellites (RAM-L)?, Western intelligence thought it was single engined! Or at least, some fighter sized airframe at the Ramenskoy test facility was.


No they thought it use powerful turbojet engines so it need to be huge (lot of fuel) so it can have similar range as F-15.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2020, 19:20
by madrat
I thought Su-27's prototype T-10 with the curvy wings had two of the engines from the MiG-27.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2020, 00:27
by element1loop
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:I don't think a large supercruiser can be a single. We are talking a plane on the order of 80,000lb.


Disagree, F-135 is currently pushing a 70,000 lb MTOW single-engine fighter, with F-16C like performance, an aircraft which is on the cusp of super-cruising now. Add variable path thrust and efficiency with ~30% larger engine diameter, and I see no problem with an NGAD maintaining efficient Mach 1.2 to 1.3 over the Indo-Pac basis and wide Asian littoral, to transit quickly then use transonic stealth, from initial point to egress, plus for loiter. With an even more blended design.

If it was determined a large single is what it will take, to get the range and payload with transit and combat dash speed, then it can be done, within an over-size clean-sheet fighter design.

The initial concern with adaptive three-path engines was how to get it compact enough to create an F135 direct replacement? Would that even fit or be possible? Turns out it is. But then the concern is, can it fully yield the potential performance and efficiency benefits/promise with an F-135 size?

Probably no, not all of it. A larger diameter will likely maximize the potential performance benefit available.

So this engine tech was initially being considered in higher diameter designs. There must have been a range of larger prototypes before it was shrunk down to a 'compact' F-135 size. So it would have been obvious from almost a decade ago that a thicker larger single-engine fighter would be able to access a 100,000 lb class single within the next decade.

So why continue with twins, when single-engine can now achieve 5,000 hr reliability, with much less space used, less NET airframe and engine weight, and better fuel efficiency everywhere? I think a larger diameter single-engine in a large fighter is a certainty - soon. The only question is, was that done with NGAD? The NGAD demonstrator was designed and has emerged in the right time-frame for it be a large super-cruising single, with more than double the thrust of an F135.

Hence, "records are being broken", etc.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2020, 03:55
by sprstdlyscottsmn
I hear what you are saying, but I don't think a plane with enough fuel to supercruise for many hundreds of miles (F-22 only has a 150nm supercruise in its radius figures) can be powered buy an F135 derivative. The NGAD is supposed to have Raptor speed with BEYOND F-35 range. It is going to be BIG. I just don't have the faith that the new engines will have 50,000lb dry thrust class with now lapse rate (twin F119 basis for that number). Now, I could be wrong, and engine tech may be more advanced than I am giving credit for. I just don't see it right now. I would be happy to be proven wrong.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2020, 06:11
by element1loop
Yeah, I'd be happy to be right too.

Keep in mind, I'm not talking about M1.6 to M1.7, I mean an 'efficient' super-cruise speed, which knocks 2 hours or so off the total mission duration, allowing more regional reach, with less fatigue.

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2020, 13:20
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Fair, the efficiency of 1.3-1.4, just past the transsonic region, compared to raptor speed would allow a smaller airframe

Re: The USAF has built and flown a full-scale Next Gen Fight

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2020, 01:43
by jetblast16
If the air force is serious about replacing the Raptor, not just in stealth and sensors, but in kinematics/ range also, then, in my opinion, the next generation fighter, the "anchor" for a family of collaborative systems, will have to carry a very large fuel load and be twin-engined. Moreover, the engines that power it will have to be "next gen" also, permitting efficient subsonic/ transonic cruise, and very high thrust in max power. No way it'll be single-engined.