Absolutely love your work man...the coverage, the graphics, all of it!! One of my favorite and top military aviation channels on YT no doubt!! Keep em coming man!
i feel old accompanying the development of these military aviation programs and others over the past decades. It feels like it was yesterday when the YF22 was competing with the YF23, and here we are 30+ years later waiting in anticipation for these 6th gen platforms to manifest themselves.
Both programs recognize the research of the NASA Aerospike engine research for hypersonic flight as demonstrated by the square nozzle outlets....GE has developed hypersonic cyclic engine which use rotation Denotation pulse rockets. I think the US NAVY needs to verify if the F35c can accept this engine design and use square outlets...
@@fleetingimprov6171 BTW They're updating the engines on the B-52. It's a custom version of the Rolls-Royce BR725 commercial engine. They will be built in the USA at their Indiana facility.
Just getting giddy imagining an E/A XX to replace the Growler. My dad was an EWO with VQ-1 on the Connie and Aries during Vietnam and then in the ERA-3B with VAQ-33, so EW has always fascinated me for its insane offensive and defensive capabilities. He's maintained he's incredibly jealous of Growler EWOs.
I would assume f35 an f/a-xx & its unmanned counterpart. Will all have the EW & CEW capability that we are used to with prowler an growler. The pods an arrays need to be deployed internally. So either the equipment needs to be built in or use the aircrafts own systems. Tberes a pod that f-35 has been testing i asssuem many are in the works. The b21 should def have its own EW & CEW capabilitys
It looks like Northrop Grumman will be selected for the U.S. Navy's sixth-generation fighter program. There will be no canard wings, but Thrust Vector Control will likely be included.
F/A-XX is primarily designed to be a Fleet Defender like the F-14. Carrying bombs is secondary mission priority. The F-35C is going to be the primary bomb truck.
@@ameritoast5174 Agreed, F-35 is the QB, NGAD/FA-XX are the knife fighters (defenders), drones (multi-mission), and until Drones are missile trucks F-15EX will be filling in. The F-16 Viper, F-36 Kingsnake, and F-15 EX will be inexpensive stand in when 5th/6th gen are not needed or to increase force multiplier.
@@ameritoast5174 I don't see anything that states the concept is dead? But I wouldn't doubt it, since it will probably be a waste of potential development funding for a long term and better replacement like the NGAD.
@gld1010 it was just a concept and the airforce turned it down a long time ago. So ots not in developmenr or anything else. Atleast thats my understanding. I wish it went through but that didn't happen.
I could see some of the lessons learned in the X-31 being put to use in the F/A-XX. Controlled flight at low speeds and high alpha would make the carrier landing at less airframe stress viable.
The block 4 F-35 can use its onboard data center to generate weapons grade locks without using radar as long as the are at least two F-35s in the engagement zone to triangulate. I can all but guarantee that this capability will be present in the NGAD and F/A-XX. This means that the air dominance the F-22 enjoyed in its earlier years may see a comeback. Not only that, but the combination of this technology with the loyal wingman program means that we might see a radical shift in combat effectiveness and doctrine.
Doesn't that mean the two F-35s have to communicate with each other? Do they have laser comms or other tight beam tech? Because if not, they're still giving away their positions.
@@Karackal From what I understand they have some sort of secure encrypted communication links, not only to communicate with each other but with all the other systems as well. It functions as a communications node/hub while processing, gathering, analyzing tons of data. The computational system is basically what makes the F35 and true 5th gen jets truly amazing and revolutionary, more so than their stealth characteristics, which are important but secondary and not comparable to the importance of their computation, sensor/radar fusion and information processing. Like the air chief of staff said; it´s a super computer that happens to fly. That is the reason why communist Chinas J20 is not a true 5th gen jet, it lacks that advanced computation technology and sensor fusion and information processing capability. It`s just a low observable jet, nothing more, it lacks the core essence of the 5th gen revolutionary nature. And even the stealth part of the J20 is questionable, since they don`t have decades of experience with RAM and they have not operated several stealth jets, plus China`s industry lacks the advanced manufacturing technology and capability, which makes their stealth technology even more questionable. Their lack of technological prowess or at least inferior tech utilized in the J20 is the reason why so many high-ranking military officers stated that they aren`t concerned about the J20, and that they do not lose sleep over it.
@@Karackal The newest datalink technology basically splatters the message across such a wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum that unless you have the transmission pattern (which is synced before entering combat), the messages just look like ambient noise. Even if a data packet was captured by dedicated e-war suites , it wouldn't look like anything in particular. It would take some serious data processing and hyperspectral analysis to retrieve a heavily encrypted communication from a modern datalink. Basically, as long as the AWACS has been taken out by an F-22, NGAD, or F/A-XX; the F-35s can fly around like assassins and take out all the planes looking for the attacking aircraft.
@Kenny-yl9pc The fusion and computational achievements of the F35 approach godlike capabilities. It can also launch missiles from warehouse planes and even integrate with SAM systems like the Patriot and launch surface to air interceptors from the ground based system without the ground based system ever having to lite up a fire control radar. Edit There's also a new type of missile called the "Mutant Morphing Missile" that's being put into testing soon that supposedly can bend and change its shape during flight to be able to intercept anything that flies.
Even with AI, it seems like a second crewman would be better at controlling a bunch of fighter drones. One pilot with no RIO would have a pretty huge pilot workload if he has to fly, strategize, maneuver, AND control flights of drone wingmen.
I agree 100%. AI isn’t there yet. We don’t have droids like R2-D2’s who are able to help co pilot aircraft! This type of aircraft definitely needs two crewman to help with task saturation.
Yea I thought about the same and came basically to the same conclusion. But with the caveat of not having any experience or qualification in aviation engineering or military aviation and technology in general (although I have an engineering degree). What is their reasoning behind this decision, does anyone know? There must be a good reason for it, surely. Maybe it´s about cost reduction, or they are very confident in their future AI ability/capability to handle diverse and general threat situations appropriately. Or it could be an engineering decision at its core, that maybe the dimensions and increased complexity for an additional pilot is not suitable for the requirements. I don´t know, those are just some basic ideas after thinking about it for around 10 seconds.... ^^ I am happy to hear any suggestions or thoughts around the matter.
You are working based upon information on technology, that you have access to. That's not the same information that the companies making these aircraft have. If they figure out stabilization, it won't even be simply AI, they'll have onboard connections to a remote Quantumn Computer, and skip past AI, as we know, entirely.
@@grantrobinson2898 not a "drone" (singular) pilot. The second seater would control MULTIPLE offboard weapon platforms (another way to look at drones/loyal wingmen). This is no different than current wizzo duties.
The F-35C isn't anywhere near 'integrated' in the fleet yet. We only have one active deployed squadron out there and they're in the beginning phases of learning how to employ it tactically.
@@forzaelite1248 As I understand it, the carriers themselves need some modifications before they can operate the F-35. Plus there's the pilot training syllabus. They have one RAG squadron right now and one operational squadron. The pilots will have to go to the RAG squadron, then take delivery of their fighters, then go through workups before they will even be able to deploy. I don't know for sure but I assume that the NAVY has factored all this in, so their procurement of F-35s will be scheduled appropriately with all of this so the timing will work out without screwing up the budget.
@@GoSlash27 ah okay, that lines up with what I heard about the exhaust melting the blast doors (P&W don't play lol). From what I've gathered they're more focused about defining the doctrine for 6th gen and stealth in their air wings and are waiting for Block 4 before ordering more but it does seem like they're willing to go all in when it's feasible. A bigger budget would probably help in a lot of places but the oversight needs way more improvement to ensure money isn't wasted on unrealistic claims/deadlines like before
@@forzaelite1248 That tracks with my understanding of the situation. Keep in mind that I'm *not* an expert on this, so I could be totally off. I get my info on this the same way you do. The JBDs' inability to handle the heat from those engines seems to be a major bottleneck, and also for some reason the non- skid coating on the flight deck, which apparently ablates and becomes a FOD issue. Plus the sensor fusion and datalinks shipboard hardware (which I know from personal experience is a logistical nightmare). Pulling out the old ship cabinets and installing the new stuff requires literally torching holes in the hull and then welding them shut. That can't be fixed until the carriers come in for refit, and those refit schedules are set in stone years in advance. My *speculation* is that the Navy doesn't want to buy large blocks of F-35s and then have them sitting around in warehouses in the desert until they can be flown, but rather buy them in appropriate lots so they can be smoothly integrated in a timely manner without blowing up the budget. That's generally how these rollouts have gone in the past, but the timing of everything is more critical in this case. The planes, pilots, and flight decks have to all become available at the same time for maximum cost efficiency and minimum loss of combat effectiveness.
As far as anyone knows, are thrust vectoring and rotating detonation thrust mutually exclusive? Also, if the A-12 had been an AF program, they would have spent whatever it took. Recall the development history of the TFX.
From what I read about the rotation detonation engine technology, it´s still far from being operational or functional for that matter. They have difficulties scaling it up and to make it efficient.
@@Kenny-yl9pchuh? I thought that rotating detonation was only to counteract a phenomenon that happened inside the combustion chamber, and rotating detonation is only for slightly increased trust and better efficiency. Sort of like injectors and differential cams (Vtec) in car engines, but now I’m not so sure. I’m going to look into it. Edit: Also I remember that the most difficult reason as to why implementing this on current engines is because of overheating problems. And we need to do some more R&D to come up with better alloys that can withstand the heat
RDE would be replacing the current combustion Chambers but as we "just" achieved to let them function and development still needs a large amount of time i think we will Not see them anytime soon but maybe in a Future block version.
@@GolddenWaffles I wasn`t talking about fuel efficiency. They cannot scale them up therefore they aren't suitable for operating airplanes or ships, basically anything useful at this point at least. Maybe in the future it changes, but they are far from operational or useable or useful for that matter. It´s more like an interesting research project without applicability at this stage. That`s at least what I understand, but I`m no expert.
@5:50 So just like Luca's RVF-171 EX, this F/A-XX could have its own mini-Drone squadron, that would be very impressive. If you're a Macross fan, you get the reference.
I have long wondered how Super Hornet would perform against Chinese Flankers in a real war. F/A-XX is imperative to prevent a major power war. I just hope that it does not arrive too late.
One thing I haven't heard about for the NGAD and now F/A-XX, is the inclusion of a gun. I know most combat will be done at a distance. But what if these planes get to the merge and dogfight? Will it be internal like the F-22 & F-35A, or be a pod like the F-35B&C, or will be in a pod stored internally that gets deployed when needed as theorized for the SU-75 concept? I might be old school, but a fighter should always have a gun available, to avoid the mistake with early F-4s that were missing a gun.
might not be a consideration. maybe it has an integral DEW that can perform that function. maybe its not maneuverable enough to practically use one. too many unknowns to speculate on something like that with certainty, but if I had to I would say no. F-35C already didn't have one, and the F/A-XX will have an even greater emphasis on stealthy BVR fighting, with a big deemphasis on individual lethality given the loyal wingmen, and the inevitable design tradeoffs needed to be made for RCS reduction
The USN's F-4s never adopted a gun that really worked, and yet they had a kill-ratio considerably better than that of the USAF, who did. The fact of the matter is that the absence of a gun wasn't the problem with the F-4, but the lackluster training of the pilots and poor maintaining of the missiles. After the Navy solved both of those, the F-4 became more than capable of doing its job with no gun at all.
The Navy will still need an aircraft that can carry a large combat weapons load out like the Airforce addressed by buying the F-15X. Stealth fighter designs are limited by internal space considerations so maybe this will be addressed through drone platforms. Time will tell.
F/A-XX core mission is fleet protection (protect the carrier) beyond the umbrella of the fleets cruisers and destroyers with longer range and loitering time. Laser maybe incorporated later when technically available. Multirole capability with its drones with be formidable.
Air Force called it NGAD and the Navy called its program NJAD but most people refer to it as FA-XX. I think Ward Carroll did a deep Intel analysis about it.
BTW you're forgetting 2 other missiles. LREW, which is a 2 stage missile in development and rhe rumored paragrim missiles, which are tiny micro missiles. Also, direct energy weapons are required for 6th gen
I imagine the AF and Navy will keep as much modularity as possible, so engine family, systems, but when it comes to the airframe I think Northrup has a bit of an edge with the Navy. I actually think the render was pretty solid. I think we'll see quite a bit of YF-23 cues in the overall design.
Which company do you expect to adopt the F/A-XX? Looking at your design, it's very similar to Northrop grumman's design from the 2010s. As expected, the fighter jet will be located at the bottom rather than the upper intake.
4:17 Not likely, and why when reconnaissance missions are significantly better served by other assets like Triton? But there is definitely a need for something better suited for the Chinese theater than what we have.
they don't affect it at all, identical signature to normal ones. the thing that does is going to be exhaust plume shaping that can be done by 2D nozzles, only seen on the Raptor so far. they do actually somewhat reduce effective RCS though as they can allow for flight control adjustments without needing control surface movement that can sometimes temporarily increase RCS.
Wait, you said "2D vectoring" regarding the F22's engines, I assume that means the outlet nozzles only vector up and down. Are all thrust vectoring planes this way, with no side to side vectoring? I think Russia has done more of these than the US, but I don't know as much about Soviet/Russian designs. I always imagined thrust vectoring to go in any and all directions, but I suppose it makes sense since a "turn" for a plane is just a gentle roll to one side and then pulling "up" (or thrust vectoring up).
I wonder when the tech will be mature enough to fly a fighter like the FA XX via a VR headset from a comfortable chair not in the aircraft? Have they gotten the lag low enough yet or are we still decades away from that function? Would be something to see if/when it gets done...☺
@@Fuck_Snowflakes You are talking about “Ēl”on Supremo Generalissimo El Moronō™?! Just checked and that is “Affirmative”, love it! I sincerely hope that the US military does not get over reliant on “SPACE KAREN” and launch competitors bring the “HEAT ON”!!
@@DamplyDoo No, no signaling can be faster than the “speed of causality”, the correlations between entanglements are “theorized” as being instantaneously linked but can not be used to communicate unfortunately. So we need some new science.
I imagine the FA-XX will undoubtedly be larger, as the biggest need is the fly further and carry larger missiles. Long range and hypersonics will be the locus of improvements. They may not need to be the best fighters or even carry the most total ordinance since the idea is also to augment them with unmanned wingmen uavs (CCA)
The requirement of longer range....The US Navy had jet and propeller planes capable of doing this like the S3 Viking with astounding ferry range and fuel economy using a turbo fan jet. The problem is the metric of not using flight time or duration of the flight. Another problem is the fuel used to achieve the hyperbolic trajectory to reach the area of operations or the target intercept point.
I don't think canards are that big of a deal in terms of stealth if they can be folded back or forward against the fuselage like the F14s wings. You really only want them for takeoffs, landings and low speed maneuvering anyway.
If it has canards it will also be able to perform well in dogfight combat, due to its agility by the canards as most planes with canards have that mobility to just, take everything down
Now that is cute, but what the Navy needs is the ST-21 program. We have a few stealth A/C now, but we as a country can not continue to throw money away.
There are interesting stories behind the cancellations of the A-6F, advanced F-14s, and the A-12. What is commonly known is not totally accurate or totally complete.
@@pat8988 Correct. I believe the decision to give the J-20 canards was based on the concept of 2 stealth fighters merging where maneuverability would supersede the need for stealth. Which is completely wrong.
Is fighting the only thing humans can do with the sky? Somehow not a single civilian intended project with plane ever gets funded (like the one from japan)
F/A XX needs also SPEED as well as stealth as with GE Rotation Denotation Hypersonic Engine. In order for it to out run other 5th and 4th generation jets with Mach 4 missiles. It also needs to do hypersonic intercepts or intercept hypersonic weapons with advantageous launch position. In fact, the requirement of supersonic supercruise is twenty to twenty five year old requirement for the 5th generation. The requirement should read able to supercruise at MACH 2. Another requirement is use of lasers which may save on weight... Electronic are getting smaller and lighter...someone lied by adding more weight...PS...Have you look at China H20 which has a variable tail rudder....using the control service of B2 or B21, it will remove the forward carnard...I beleive variable tail rudder will performance at low speed during carrier landing.
I’ve always wondered why the Raptor was Air Force only but the Lightning II was a platform shared by the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force…. Now everyone is designing Gen 6 fighters! This time around the Air Force is designing it’s own while the Navy (and probably the Marine Corps too) is working on their own design. Any chance of a repeat of the Lighting II with different versions going to different branches?
These are all separate programs explicitly because they did not want to repeat the disaster that was integrating all the F-35 variants (more specifically the B model though) into one program. Gave the DOD institutional PTSD.
It kind of just depends what the canard is doing. At roughly the same altitude flying straight and level the canard doesnt make much difference on stealth. Otherwise it will start to increase rcs.
So, active flow control and/or metamorphic wings are out? I am a bit concerned about the lack of focus on maneuverability. This decision was made for third generation jet fighters as well and it turned out, that the dogfight was, in fact, not dead at all. This seems like an instance of history repeating itself.
If these are even more stealthy, then they will be able to destroy targets before they get close enough to dogfight. However, life doesn't always go to plan, so perhaps the CCA drones will help out in that regard.
Tail planes are bad for stealth because they're the right size to resonate with LF radar waves. So putting canards on it that are of somewhat similar size to tail planes would be re-introducing a structure of the right size to resonate with certain radar frequencies. Seems kinda counter productive.
Whatever happened to the F-35 replacing the F/A-18 Super Hornet? Is it because the F-35 is absolutely INCAPABLE of performing the role of existing aircraft??
Absolutely love your work man...the coverage, the graphics, all of it!! One of my favorite and top military aviation channels on YT no doubt!! Keep em coming man!
Thank you! Next video is the A-12 Avenger. Aiming for next Friday, as long as my CPU can keep remodeling, stay tuned!
Great video
🇨🇦 Veteran
Agreed this
i feel old accompanying the development of these military aviation programs and others over the past decades. It feels like it was yesterday when the YF22 was competing with the YF23, and here we are 30+ years later waiting in anticipation for these 6th gen platforms to manifest themselves.
Indeed - I remember taking to my dad about the ATF completion - and here we are.
Cheer up, we're still flying/buying the F-15.
Both programs recognize the research of the NASA Aerospike engine research for hypersonic flight as demonstrated by the square nozzle outlets....GE has developed hypersonic cyclic engine which use rotation Denotation pulse rockets. I think the US NAVY needs to verify if the F35c can accept this engine design and use square outlets...
@@fleetingimprov6171 BTW They're updating the engines on the B-52. It's a custom version of the Rolls-Royce BR725 commercial engine. They will be built in the USA at their Indiana facility.
Just getting giddy imagining an E/A XX to replace the Growler. My dad was an EWO with VQ-1 on the Connie and Aries during Vietnam and then in the ERA-3B with VAQ-33, so EW has always fascinated me for its insane offensive and defensive capabilities. He's maintained he's incredibly jealous of Growler EWOs.
I would assume f35 an f/a-xx & its unmanned counterpart. Will all have the EW & CEW capability that we are used to with prowler an growler. The pods an arrays need to be deployed internally. So either the equipment needs to be built in or use the aircrafts own systems. Tberes a pod that f-35 has been testing i asssuem many are in the works. The b21 should def have its own EW & CEW capabilitys
God bless your Father for his service to this country. God Bless you as well.
@@DallasBates-xm5vfI've seen it said that f35 block 4 has greater ew capability than growler already. I can't verify it tho
It looks like Northrop Grumman will be selected for the U.S. Navy's sixth-generation fighter program.
There will be no canard wings, but Thrust Vector Control will likely be included.
I find it funny that Lockheed is teasing their 6th Gen Fighter like it's a new luxury car.
F/A-XX is primarily designed to be a Fleet Defender like the F-14. Carrying bombs is secondary mission priority.
The F-35C is going to be the primary bomb truck.
The F-35 and the drones that they build for the NGAD program. They will be the workhorses for the navy and air force.
@@ameritoast5174 Agreed, F-35 is the QB, NGAD/FA-XX are the knife fighters (defenders), drones (multi-mission), and until Drones are missile trucks F-15EX will be filling in. The F-16 Viper, F-36 Kingsnake, and F-15 EX will be inexpensive stand in when 5th/6th gen are not needed or to increase force multiplier.
@gld1010 the Kingsnake is just a concept and not happening. F-15 ex will be the airforce missile truck that follows behind to unload on an enemy.
@@ameritoast5174 I don't see anything that states the concept is dead? But I wouldn't doubt it, since it will probably be a waste of potential development funding for a long term and better replacement like the NGAD.
@gld1010 it was just a concept and the airforce turned it down a long time ago. So ots not in developmenr or anything else. Atleast thats my understanding. I wish it went through but that didn't happen.
I could see some of the lessons learned in the X-31 being put to use in the F/A-XX. Controlled flight at low speeds and high alpha would make the carrier landing at less airframe stress viable.
Thanks!
Thank you John! Next video is a “what if” on the A-12 Avenger, should be done in a couple of days.
Yours truly, seeing the canards...bro, that X-36!
The block 4 F-35 can use its onboard data center to generate weapons grade locks without using radar as long as the are at least two F-35s in the engagement zone to triangulate. I can all but guarantee that this capability will be present in the NGAD and F/A-XX. This means that the air dominance the F-22 enjoyed in its earlier years may see a comeback. Not only that, but the combination of this technology with the loyal wingman program means that we might see a radical shift in combat effectiveness and doctrine.
Doesn't that mean the two F-35s have to communicate with each other? Do they have laser comms or other tight beam tech? Because if not, they're still giving away their positions.
@@Karackal From what I understand they have some sort of secure encrypted communication links, not only to communicate with each other but with all the other systems as well. It functions as a communications node/hub while processing, gathering, analyzing tons of data. The computational system is basically what makes the F35 and true 5th gen jets truly amazing and revolutionary, more so than their stealth characteristics, which are important but secondary and not comparable to the importance of their computation, sensor/radar fusion and information processing. Like the air chief of staff said; it´s a super computer that happens to fly.
That is the reason why communist Chinas J20 is not a true 5th gen jet, it lacks that advanced computation technology and sensor fusion and information processing capability. It`s just a low observable jet, nothing more, it lacks the core essence of the 5th gen revolutionary nature. And even the stealth part of the J20 is questionable, since they don`t have decades of experience with RAM and they have not operated several stealth jets, plus China`s industry lacks the advanced manufacturing technology and capability, which makes their stealth technology even more questionable. Their lack of technological prowess or at least inferior tech utilized in the J20 is the reason why so many high-ranking military officers stated that they aren`t concerned about the J20, and that they do not lose sleep over it.
@@Karackal The newest datalink technology basically splatters the message across such a wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum that unless you have the transmission pattern (which is synced before entering combat), the messages just look like ambient noise. Even if a data packet was captured by dedicated e-war suites , it wouldn't look like anything in particular. It would take some serious data processing and hyperspectral analysis to retrieve a heavily encrypted communication from a modern datalink. Basically, as long as the AWACS has been taken out by an F-22, NGAD, or F/A-XX; the F-35s can fly around like assassins and take out all the planes looking for the attacking aircraft.
@@Karackal the MADL they use is beamform and can reach gigabit data speeds if necessary, they got it down
@Kenny-yl9pc The fusion and computational achievements of the F35 approach godlike capabilities. It can also launch missiles from warehouse planes and even integrate with SAM systems like the Patriot and launch surface to air interceptors from the ground based system without the ground based system ever having to lite up a fire control radar.
Edit There's also a new type of missile called the "Mutant Morphing Missile" that's being put into testing soon that supposedly can bend and change its shape during flight to be able to intercept anything that flies.
I can't be the only one who sees the XF/A-36 Game from Ace Combat right?
Great work Photog.
Thank you and yes, one day I will figure out a way to do an Ace Combat video :)
Yeah I somewhat see it, the XFA-36 is one of absolute favourite "fictional" designs in Ace Combat.
I see a SU-57 without vertical tails.... that body shape is identical.
Even with AI, it seems like a second crewman would be better at controlling a bunch of fighter drones. One pilot with no RIO would have a pretty huge pilot workload if he has to fly, strategize, maneuver, AND control flights of drone wingmen.
I agree 100%. AI isn’t there yet. We don’t have droids like R2-D2’s who are able to help co pilot aircraft! This type of aircraft definitely needs two crewman to help with task saturation.
Yea I thought about the same and came basically to the same conclusion. But with the caveat of not having any experience or qualification in aviation engineering or military aviation and technology in general (although I have an engineering degree). What is their reasoning behind this decision, does anyone know? There must be a good reason for it, surely. Maybe it´s about cost reduction, or they are very confident in their future AI ability/capability to handle diverse and general threat situations appropriately. Or it could be an engineering decision at its core, that maybe the dimensions and increased complexity for an additional pilot is not suitable for the requirements. I don´t know, those are just some basic ideas after thinking about it for around 10 seconds.... ^^ I am happy to hear any suggestions or thoughts around the matter.
@@Kenny-yl9pc That's probably what the DOD has been figuring out by using its fleet of AI piloted F-16s.
You are working based upon information on technology, that you have access to. That's not the same information that the companies making these aircraft have. If they figure out stabilization, it won't even be simply AI, they'll have onboard connections to a remote Quantumn Computer, and skip past AI, as we know, entirely.
@@ProudFilthyCasual No definitely not quantum computers. They are only really useful for encryption related matters.
Most F/A-XX renderings I've seen are two-seaters. Even with AI, I think it likely that a back-seater will be included as a drone controller.
It would be a good idea if the "CCA" UAVs don't work as well autonomously as desired.
why on earth would you put a drone pilot in the plane? Extremely unnecessary risk of assets.
@@grantrobinson2898 not a "drone" (singular) pilot. The second seater would control MULTIPLE offboard weapon platforms (another way to look at drones/loyal wingmen). This is no different than current wizzo duties.
Love your videos, my favorite You Tube Chanel
Keep it rolling, we need it.
Excellent video!!!
Love your videos.
More detailed and accurate than I was expecting.
well done.
The F-35C isn't anywhere near 'integrated' in the fleet yet. We only have one active deployed squadron out there and they're in the beginning phases of learning how to employ it tactically.
do you know why it's taking as long as it is? just curious as I don't really hear the Navy talking too much about the state of things
@@forzaelite1248 As I understand it, the carriers themselves need some modifications before they can operate the F-35. Plus there's the pilot training syllabus. They have one RAG squadron right now and one operational squadron. The pilots will have to go to the RAG squadron, then take delivery of their fighters, then go through workups before they will even be able to deploy.
I don't know for sure but I assume that the NAVY has factored all this in, so their procurement of F-35s will be scheduled appropriately with all of this so the timing will work out without screwing up the budget.
@@GoSlash27 ah okay, that lines up with what I heard about the exhaust melting the blast doors (P&W don't play lol). From what I've gathered they're more focused about defining the doctrine for 6th gen and stealth in their air wings and are waiting for Block 4 before ordering more but it does seem like they're willing to go all in when it's feasible. A bigger budget would probably help in a lot of places but the oversight needs way more improvement to ensure money isn't wasted on unrealistic claims/deadlines like before
@@forzaelite1248 That tracks with my understanding of the situation. Keep in mind that I'm *not* an expert on this, so I could be totally off. I get my info on this the same way you do.
The JBDs' inability to handle the heat from those engines seems to be a major bottleneck, and also for some reason the non- skid coating on the flight deck, which apparently ablates and becomes a FOD issue. Plus the sensor fusion and datalinks shipboard hardware (which I know from personal experience is a logistical nightmare). Pulling out the old ship cabinets and installing the new stuff requires literally torching holes in the hull and then welding them shut. That can't be fixed until the carriers come in for refit, and those refit schedules are set in stone years in advance.
My *speculation* is that the Navy doesn't want to buy large blocks of F-35s and then have them sitting around in warehouses in the desert until they can be flown, but rather buy them in appropriate lots so they can be smoothly integrated in a timely manner without blowing up the budget. That's generally how these rollouts have gone in the past, but the timing of everything is more critical in this case. The planes, pilots, and flight decks have to all become available at the same time for maximum cost efficiency and minimum loss of combat effectiveness.
Amazing video. Love it.❤
I strongly believe that it needs to be a 2 seater aircraft like a tomcat.
It needs a two seater so the second person can be used to control the drones that are usual sent with the fighter jets.
Needs to be a two seater, so it can have 1 and 1/2 weapons (effects) officer and 1/2 time pilot.
+10 for "Super Bog". Cap would be tickled.
As far as anyone knows, are thrust vectoring and rotating detonation thrust mutually exclusive?
Also, if the A-12 had been an AF program, they would have spent whatever it took. Recall the development history of the TFX.
From what I read about the rotation detonation engine technology, it´s still far from being operational or functional for that matter. They have difficulties scaling it up and to make it efficient.
@@Kenny-yl9pchuh? I thought that rotating detonation was only to counteract a phenomenon that happened inside the combustion chamber, and rotating detonation is only for slightly increased trust and better efficiency. Sort of like injectors and differential cams (Vtec) in car engines, but now I’m not so sure. I’m going to look into it.
Edit: Also I remember that the most difficult reason as to why implementing this on current engines is because of overheating problems. And we need to do some more R&D to come up with better alloys that can withstand the heat
RDE would be replacing the current combustion Chambers but as we "just" achieved to let them function and development still needs a large amount of time i think we will Not see them anytime soon but maybe in a Future block version.
@@GolddenWaffles I wasn`t talking about fuel efficiency. They cannot scale them up therefore they aren't suitable for operating airplanes or ships, basically anything useful at this point at least. Maybe in the future it changes, but they are far from operational or useable or useful for that matter. It´s more like an interesting research project without applicability at this stage. That`s at least what I understand, but I`m no expert.
@5:50 So just like Luca's RVF-171 EX, this F/A-XX could have its own mini-Drone squadron, that would be very impressive. If you're a Macross fan, you get the reference.
I have long wondered how Super Hornet would perform against Chinese Flankers in a real war. F/A-XX is imperative to prevent a major power war. I just hope that it does not arrive too late.
I hope the Chinese government don't get a hold of this technology
One thing I haven't heard about for the NGAD and now F/A-XX, is the inclusion of a gun. I know most combat will be done at a distance. But what if these planes get to the merge and dogfight? Will it be internal like the F-22 & F-35A, or be a pod like the F-35B&C, or will be in a pod stored internally that gets deployed when needed as theorized for the SU-75 concept? I might be old school, but a fighter should always have a gun available, to avoid the mistake with early F-4s that were missing a gun.
might not be a consideration. maybe it has an integral DEW that can perform that function. maybe its not maneuverable enough to practically use one. too many unknowns to speculate on something like that with certainty, but if I had to I would say no. F-35C already didn't have one, and the F/A-XX will have an even greater emphasis on stealthy BVR fighting, with a big deemphasis on individual lethality given the loyal wingmen, and the inevitable design tradeoffs needed to be made for RCS reduction
The USN's F-4s never adopted a gun that really worked, and yet they had a kill-ratio considerably better than that of the USAF, who did.
The fact of the matter is that the absence of a gun wasn't the problem with the F-4, but the lackluster training of the pilots and poor maintaining of the missiles.
After the Navy solved both of those, the F-4 became more than capable of doing its job with no gun at all.
Wingman drone with a cannon 😊
The Navy will still need an aircraft that can carry a large combat weapons load out like the Airforce addressed by buying the F-15X. Stealth fighter designs are limited by internal space considerations so maybe this will be addressed through drone platforms. Time will tell.
Early squad! For no particular reason……
You are first, thanks for commenting!
Could the canards be variable? Mini f14 canards? That would help minimize the return signature sub and supersonic.
it's going to be a big aircraft, at least the size of the TomCat
Indeed - gotta have that range. Thanks for commenting!
I think it's the one sure thing we know at this point. Other than it will be more stealthy
Amazing that they can fit all that in there. Hats off to the engineers. It's like they took an SR 71 and made it more compact.
FA-XX reminds me of the unmanned X-Plane X-36. Delta wing combined with canards and no vertical tail.
Agree that X-36 was crucial in developing control systems for gen. 6 fighters.
Beautiful F/A-XX JET
F/A-XX core mission is fleet protection
(protect the carrier)
beyond the umbrella of the fleets cruisers and destroyers
with longer range and loitering time.
Laser maybe incorporated later
when technically available.
Multirole capability with its drones with be formidable.
Look like the YF23 design will be used in the future, it’s to bad it never got chosen as it was overall the better plane than the YF22.
Congratulations 🎉🎉❤
We are ready ❤❤
👌 Awesome
Did you leave out the laser for the new jet?
I was pretty sure that the NGAD fighter was an Air Force aircraft
There are two NGAD programs. One for the Air Force and one for the Navy. There will be two different fighters.
Air Force called it NGAD and the Navy called its program NJAD but most people refer to it as FA-XX. I think Ward Carroll did a deep Intel analysis about it.
Hope it has atleast 8Gs capability atleast and hope it has speed no less than mach 2
BTW you're forgetting 2 other missiles. LREW, which is a 2 stage missile in development and rhe rumored paragrim missiles, which are tiny micro missiles. Also, direct energy weapons are required for 6th gen
I imagine the AF and Navy will keep as much modularity as possible, so engine family, systems, but when it comes to the airframe I think Northrup has a bit of an edge with the Navy. I actually think the render was pretty solid. I think we'll see quite a bit of YF-23 cues in the overall design.
So how is yaw controlled? Puffers from the engines or from another internal method that uses compressors?
Which company do you expect to adopt the F/A-XX?
Looking at your design, it's very similar to Northrop grumman's design from the 2010s.
As expected, the fighter jet will be located at the bottom rather than the upper intake.
4:17 Not likely, and why when reconnaissance missions are significantly better served by other assets like Triton? But there is definitely a need for something better suited for the Chinese theater than what we have.
I have to wonder how thrust vectoring engines will affect the IR signature.
they don't affect it at all, identical signature to normal ones. the thing that does is going to be exhaust plume shaping that can be done by 2D nozzles, only seen on the Raptor so far.
they do actually somewhat reduce effective RCS though as they can allow for flight control adjustments without needing control surface movement that can sometimes temporarily increase RCS.
looks lethal
Wait, you said "2D vectoring" regarding the F22's engines, I assume that means the outlet nozzles only vector up and down. Are all thrust vectoring planes this way, with no side to side vectoring? I think Russia has done more of these than the US, but I don't know as much about Soviet/Russian designs.
I always imagined thrust vectoring to go in any and all directions, but I suppose it makes sense since a "turn" for a plane is just a gentle roll to one side and then pulling "up" (or thrust vectoring up).
Nice. Finally find out why there is NGAD alongside F 35 and what can they do with both.
Anyway, i am waiting for A 12 vid 😊
A-12 is next! Friday September 15th, see you then and thanks for commenting
I wonder when the tech will be mature enough to fly a fighter like the FA XX via a VR headset from a comfortable chair not in the aircraft? Have they gotten the lag low enough yet or are we still decades away from that function? Would be something to see if/when it gets done...☺
Well if Space Karen doesn't fuck up the satellite connection again we may get there soon.
Quantum communication is instantaneous
@@Fuck_Snowflakes
You are talking about “Ēl”on Supremo Generalissimo El Moronō™?! Just checked and that is “Affirmative”, love it! I sincerely hope that the US military does not get over reliant on “SPACE KAREN” and launch competitors bring the “HEAT ON”!!
@@DamplyDoo
No, no signaling can be faster than the “speed of causality”, the correlations between entanglements are “theorized” as being instantaneously linked but can not be used to communicate unfortunately. So we need some new science.
@@Mentaculus42 what if they prove the engagement and can flip the atoms in between 0 or1, this sending a binary signal
What if the helmet breaks hours would yu fly without instruments or hud?
I imagine the FA-XX will undoubtedly be larger, as the biggest need is the fly further and carry larger missiles. Long range and hypersonics will be the locus of improvements. They may not need to be the best fighters or even carry the most total ordinance since the idea is also to augment them with unmanned wingmen uavs (CCA)
The requirement of longer range....The US Navy had jet and propeller planes capable of doing this like the S3 Viking with astounding ferry range and fuel economy using a turbo fan jet. The problem is the metric of not using flight time or duration of the flight. Another problem is the fuel used to achieve the hyperbolic trajectory to reach the area of operations or the target intercept point.
❤Great aero dymanics invloved, what is the max altitude is achieveable ?
Will it have STOVL variant?
Its a wonder they dont have drones that attach to the wings and have their own engine and could function in unison or all three independently
I don't think canards are that big of a deal in terms of stealth if they can be folded back or forward against the fuselage like the F14s wings.
You really only want them for takeoffs, landings and low speed maneuvering anyway.
Some say that it's not stealth if it has canards
Good info, but it definitely won't have canards.
I hope yall know they already have this plane
The only thing i want from the FAXX is for it to be named Corsair 2
The lack of vertical tail is very trendy.
As i remember NASA did a study that in dogfight it is still better to have a vertical tail.
I guess someone dropped off the blueprints to this jet....interesting because a contractor hasn't been selected.
If it has canards it will also be able to perform well in dogfight combat, due to its agility by the canards as most planes with canards have that mobility to just, take everything down
What's the point of removing the rudder? If you're just gonna add canards in the front and put the drag back on the aircraft.
Now that is cute, but what the Navy needs is the ST-21 program. We have a few stealth A/C now, but we as a country can not continue to throw money away.
Northrop Grumman F-14ST super Tomcat stealth
However long the F-35 has actually been in service, has it ever proven how effective sensor fusion and stealth are??
The F-22 was the second best aircraft in the ATF competition. The F-23 was the better plane in nearly every way.
I think you will enjoy my next video then - Friday
The aircraft will not need canards if upward only thrust vectoring is employed for assisted take off and rapid HOA turning for dogfighting.
The FA-XX should be dubbed the Tigercat.
No STOVL?
F/A-XX is imperative to prevent great power war.
There are interesting stories behind the cancellations of the A-6F, advanced F-14s, and the A-12. What is commonly known is not totally accurate or totally complete.
Very good but it will not have canards.
Maybe not, but we will see. I’ll make an update video with a newer version as soon as we know more. Thanks for commenting!
There seems to be no point in having both canards and thrust vectoring. No one would suggest that the F-22 needs canards, would they?
@@pat8988 Correct. I believe the decision to give the J-20 canards was based on the concept of 2 stealth fighters merging where maneuverability would supersede the need for stealth. Which is completely wrong.
@PilotPhotog. Canards??? You lost a lot of credibility with that one.
@@wr6392 Come on, no one knows for sure.
The FA-xx needs to have comparable range to the st-21 tomcat.
F23s baby
Is fighting the only thing humans can do with the sky? Somehow not a single civilian intended project with plane ever gets funded (like the one from japan)
I get The Squidd vibes
This is effectively what Boeing cooked up in 2013 🤔
Visually anyway
F/A XX needs also SPEED as well as stealth as with GE Rotation Denotation Hypersonic Engine. In order for it to out run other 5th and 4th generation jets with Mach 4 missiles. It also needs to do hypersonic intercepts or intercept hypersonic weapons with advantageous launch position. In fact, the requirement of supersonic supercruise is twenty to twenty five year old requirement for the 5th generation. The requirement should read able to supercruise at MACH 2. Another requirement is use of lasers which may save on weight... Electronic are getting smaller and lighter...someone lied by adding more weight...PS...Have you look at China H20 which has a variable tail rudder....using the control service of B2 or B21, it will remove the forward carnard...I beleive variable tail rudder will performance at low speed during carrier landing.
Long live America 🇺🇸🌍🐘🦄🦅🦁🐯👌💐✌👈👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
I’ve always wondered why the Raptor was Air Force only but the Lightning II was a platform shared by the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force….
Now everyone is designing Gen 6 fighters!
This time around the Air Force is designing it’s own while the Navy (and probably the Marine Corps too) is working on their own design.
Any chance of a repeat of the Lighting II with different versions going to different branches?
USMC does not have a 6th gen program
These are all separate programs explicitly because they did not want to repeat the disaster that was integrating all the F-35 variants (more specifically the B model though) into one program. Gave the DOD institutional PTSD.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716
Ah, gotcha!
Canards are extremely non stealth, right?
I heard they are less than ideal related to the J-20.
It kind of just depends what the canard is doing. At roughly the same altitude flying straight and level the canard doesnt make much difference on stealth. Otherwise it will start to increase rcs.
the navy just said that tailless design isnt necessary in their plane. and i believe there will be at least a 2 person crew for most missions.
It will be a 2-seater.
So, active flow control and/or metamorphic wings are out?
I am a bit concerned about the lack of focus on maneuverability. This decision was made for third generation jet fighters as well and it turned out, that the dogfight was, in fact, not dead at all. This seems like an instance of history repeating itself.
If these are even more stealthy, then they will be able to destroy targets before they get close enough to dogfight. However, life doesn't always go to plan, so perhaps the CCA drones will help out in that regard.
@@deansmits006 what if the enemy aircraft get more and more stealthy as well until noone sees the other before they're already merged?
USA can build anything with huge supermassive budget..,hatts-off to engineers
Canard wings? Com’on, it looks a combination of YF-23 with J-20
Tail planes are bad for stealth because they're the right size to resonate with LF radar waves. So putting canards on it that are of somewhat similar size to tail planes would be re-introducing a structure of the right size to resonate with certain radar frequencies. Seems kinda counter productive.
Thrust vectoring would have no impact on carrier take off or landing.
Just get a f 14 and modify it to be stealthy fast with a good radar
So... confirmed this is the fighter we are going with now?
You have obviously never worked fighter contracts with the Navy.
And you completely missed the sarcasm.
Almost like from the movie Stealth from 2005
Faxx hmm what happened to the aurora. Smoke screen here
Literally XF-23 without vertical stabilizers.
Hey where are the dorks going "canards aren't stealthy" Now?
Whatever happened to the F-35 replacing the F/A-18 Super Hornet? Is it because the F-35 is absolutely INCAPABLE of performing the role of existing aircraft??
KAAN gökyüzünün efendisi!❤🇹🇷❤✈