If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: ForThePeople.com/pilotphotog
I think the beak is probably? The same style of 2D tv system as on the F22. . . Stealthy And agile! And I think the V shape is meant to bounce radar waves away to other angles than they came from, kinda like the rear shape of the B2 😊
I already listed a few ideas, however what I really wanted to talk about is The SR-72's name!😅 Instead of Son of Blackbird I think it should be The Dark Phoenix! Way better name, the program like a Phoenix rises from the ashes, stays with the "Dark" theme from pop culture, it'd be an homage for the Mach 5 AIM-54 Phoenix, and for all the comic fans! The SR-72 Dark Phoenix!👍
As others have said the NGAD won't have a single engine and will be much larger. I will add that it almost certainly will be a TWIN seat plane. One pilot and one drone operator. America is building this plane to fight in the Pacific over areas many thousands of miles in size without suitable airstrips. Range, speed and longevity are top priorities.
@@c0mputaradds performance and range. Bird can be bigger and carry more. Supercruise can probably be guaranteed. Especially if the adaptive cycle engine programs pull through. And perhaps most importantly dual engines provide more power for onboard systems which is becoming more and more important.
Excellent point and completely makes sense, especially given the vast ranges in the Pacific. For this video, I tried to stay true to the image that Lockheed released, but I am already working on a follow up with a larger version of this jet. Thanks for commenting!
Name: Crow, Raven, or Corvus Reason: in concert with its drone wingmen, the NGAD is basically the center of a flock of these birds and flock of Corvus birds is a "Murder". and evocative name and given the Corvus' reputation for intelligence as well, it seeks to fit.
@@cristianocollarin2236 Wait... the F-111 "Aardvark" (Easy to remember because it is so damned strange but likely named for its long-ish schnoz)? A Variant? Wouldn't EF-111 "Raven" be like the F-16 being a nicknamed "Viper" (a name shared with the AH-1z), and not "Fighting Falcon" as it is official callsign?
For the name, I was leaning towards Owl (or some variant thereof). Reason being that the focus here is on stealth and being able to take down the target before they even know what hit them. The owl, among all other birds of prey, is noted for being silent in flight and capable of ambushes even in densely packed forests. So much so that owl wings are a major study topic in biomimicry for reducing noise in fans, wings, helicopter blades, boat propellors, etc.
My guess is 2 adaptive cycle engines on a large frame with no legacy control surfaces. Almost like a flying wing/delta wing hybrid. Extended range for Pacific theatre. 2 seater w/ability to be flown remotely in high risk/high altitude missions. Ability to command and control drones. Designed with next gen weapons in mind.
I see no reason for a manned aircraft at all. These planes could be flown from anywhere on Earth. Also removing the crew would allow the aircraft to maneuver at forces well above a sustained 10Gs, the human limit. If two truly stealth fighters meet in aerial combat, it may quickly break down into a gunfight so the most maneuverable plane wins.
I would call it Raven. Ravens have black feathers, they blend in especially at night. Ravens are incredibly intelligent birds capable of sharing their knowledge with their offspring. They've been observed making and using tools to accomplish their goals. I think this is quite fitting for a stealth aircraft that communicates with its own drones.
Considering the Viper name is just a nickname for the F-16(it’s officially Fighting Falcon) I think Viper is appropriate. Plus it kinda looks like the Viper in Battlestar Galactica.
Interestingly one of the original proposed names for the F-16 was the Viper due to the orignal BSG show being on the air at the time in the late 1970s. The name was rejected because a general famously said that he didn't want a fighter to be named "after some snake" The pilots and maintainers continued to call it the Viper anyway, and there is an award given to the top F-16 pilot each year which has the name Viper in it. Officially it is the "Fighting Falcon" but the latest F-16, the F-16V is referred to as the Viper. Here is a video I did about the F-16, including a the story of the naming with the full quote from that general: ruclips.net/video/0P5Xmas0Lkg/видео.html
@@Camilo_Z yes of course Apache, kiyowa, comanche, blackhawk and my favorite Iroquois. Hmm I mean they code the Cobra and Viper (not sure but I think they are in Huey family so they are Iroquois) cant wait for Thog to tackle about helos.
Call me crazy but I think the Darkstar was a preview of the NGAD more so than the SR71 successor. Regardless I'm excited to see the new generation of fighters.
@@WolfeSaberThat's my bet, Photogs model probably isn't far off, just a bit smaller than the likely result. 2 shrouded engines, Twin seat (Maybe tandem)
The grooves down the sides of the fuselage are very interesting, I’m pretty sure those are being used to provide some of the aerodynamic stability lost with the removal of vertical stabilizers.
Nice job on the CGI model, but no way this will be their NGAD prototype. It's too small and the single engine design won't meet the range requirements for NGAD, which are much longer than the F-22 and F-35. I believe this design is more likely to be one of the NGAD X-Plane technology demonstrators that Kendall revealed a few weeks ago.
The NGAD, in that design concept, looks like the fabled F-19 Ghostrider without vertical surfaces. I vote the F-47 Thundershadow, because with the A-10 still in service I can't see a Thunderbolt III!!
Good Artwork, but I believe it will be about twice the size shown against the Drones and directional controls will use engine bleed air to aid in maneuverability akin to the Hawker vent ducts. It will have huge internal stowage.
The NGAD will be highly integrated with the B-21 Raider. Bomber, drones, and NGAD along with the F-35 will work as a team to achieve air dominance. A dog fighter or extreme maneuverability is not the primary goal of this platform (ex the legacy P-51 mustang is WAY more maneuverable than any current jet fighter aircraft, but wouldn’t stand a chance in modern air combat warfare). I vote to call it the Sabre, Shadow, Savage. Too bad Reaper has already been used.
Highly integrated with stuff that flies half it's speed? And they probably out-turn it at low speed. WHY WOULD YOU EVEN DO THAT? It's supposed to go HIGH and QUICK for mIssile dispersion and Interceptions. This is not the F-35 program. the "One Plane does it all" stuff. If it would be that, with all those requirements, you would see the DoD go bust before it is paid.
It looks like it might be the fastest combat aircraft we've seen in a long while. If they have the right materials. I wouldn't be suprised if this ends up being a mach 3+ capable aircraft.
It will be aerodynamically unstable. Most electronically-stabilized aircraft are not fighters, more bombers that are sub-sonic. Expect a few accidents in the flight test program while they rediscover the laws of areoynamic stability. Again.
@@matsv201 Most fighter aircraft are at least marginally unstable to make them more manoevrable. But they can still fly without electronic flight stability aids, just like the F-18A/F (with difficulty). But aircraft like NGAD and B21 etc tail-less aircraft are completely aerodynamically unstable, not at all manoevrable and difficult (or impossible?) to land in a strong cross-wind. You just have to eject - a very expensive way to fly an aircraft.
Nah, it must be a bird that annoys the heck out of you so you get aggressive. Especially one that you can't see. That is the association (and basically the Job of this airplane).
Yes, that lever will have to rest on a solid fulcrum. Like Physics. Directional signaling and Electromagnetic suppression/stealth might be a factor. Maybe they should build it from Plywood. Let's not forget that "Stealth" or "The RCS-reduction of certain shapes" was calculated by a sovjet scientist, in the 40's i believe. During the 90's Lockheed bought a ton of old Yakovlev patents and paperwork. Because Yeltsin the Drunk Bear had sold out the Industry to USA (Remember cheap fuel)? Yet Russia Never put a Stealth plane into production. Have you wondered why they only did so, AFTER the USA did? Because they remembered the Realities of the cold war. No matter how stealth your plane is, It can't fly forever. And an ICBM has no problem hitting an airfield. And even the biggest Bombers don't have the firepower to "first strike" a country into submission. It is either conventional warfare or "Game Over". And "game over" is bad for MIC-Business.
Specter. Also I don't see something with "Arid Dominance" in its acronym giving up maneuverability/range/payload... think this platform is going to be a lot bigger than that and my reason is the Pacific Ocean's size. As far as weapons go if they go with something like Peregrine you get a full AMRAAM in have a half size package. I see that being more useful than a jet that can go really far and only carry 4-6 AA Missiles. Just my 2 cents.
Great video. Please more on the NGAD- topic!! And by the way: the shape showed by Skunkworks may also resemble the silouette of a single-engine test article flown or still flying in Groom Lake.
Great work, Tog! There are so many systems designed or being designed for having advantages for success/combat, they're needed as everything is getting more and more complex and the capability to do more than ever, just fascinating. It's always what can be conceived, then made, then counter. I bet the warfare that is going on now, like in Ukraine, though they are given old stockpiles that are being used up, while those new weapons aren't used to the point of what is being revealed, since the other side(s) want to know the capabilities and weaknesses and how to counter and defeat them. That's just my guess. I'm not too good at naming names, the only thought of I could come up with, by the overall design and shape is Assassin, since it looks more sleek and deadly.
Assassin could work, others have suggested Raven, Wyvern, Ghost, and Phantom II to name a few. Thanks for commenting, for being a member, and now you know!
@@PilotPhotog The F4 series Already claimed Phantom II and its' name predecessor the FH-1 claimed Phantom. EF-111A were known as Ravens. Now a Ghost with a flock of Ghost Bats.......Hmmmm Sticking with Falcon bird theme; Peregrine?
I really like how the rear chines above the engine provide yaw stability when all flight surfaces are centered, so yaw control is only done by the split rudders when needed.
I can't help but think that keeping the plane stable at low speeds (i.e. landing) is going to be tricky. Not much margin for error with in-line control surfaces, so unless AI does some kind of magic, this thing may be coming in fast and require some seriously long runways.
Maybe they could design a system that allows for vertical stabs to pop up and drop. Its never been done before but it would allow for both maneuverability with stabs up and stealth and distance with stabs . I mean they have fold in wings… why not try fold in vert stabs? The f35 did all kinds of crazy things… there needs to be something crazier a new game changer.
Speaking of likewise, the new Boeing airliner design with the ridiculous long and thin wing for high speed cruise (where do you put the flaps?), but plus truss-bracing with albeit some lift (not new, back to Bellanca in the 1930s). Can't wait until on approach at slow speed and icing occurs and the plane drops out of the sky cause they didn't learn lessons on the ATR-42/72 icing incidents/accidents?
@@iceebearhawaii1735 Boeing Airliner still has a rudder though. It CAN change direction when attempting a landing at slightly less than ideal crosswinds.
All good suggestions, I believe the CIA's A-12 was codenamed the Archangel - and was made by Lockheed so I could see this being the Archangel II. Here's a video I did about it, and how the CIA came up with an ingenious way to buy titanium from the Soviets: ruclips.net/video/9mVXdo0QmPo/видео.htmlsi=swjJ_knVi9K8gVm_
Thanks for the vid, nicely put together. Though I think it's going to have two engines and be significantly larger than you show here. For the future (Pacific theater) it needs to be able to carry larger longer range missiles and have significantly longer range. It will need more size for that. IMO.
Interesting concept - just don't land in a strong cross-wind! Vectored thrust can only do so much for you. Taking off will not be easy either. It is an understatement that stealth and low observability will come at a cost of manouvreability. Just don't expect good outcomes in a traditional arial dogfight.
cool video - thanks for making me aware of this super amazing project. As for a name, my suggestion is "Wraith" - mostly because it sounds cool and kinda goes with it's intended use (IMO)
Another great post Juan, I suspect the NGAD's significant departure from current operational "stealthy fighter" designs, means NGAD is more aerodynamically unstable than its predecessors. If so, logically that leads to need for a flight management system of superior capabilities. Thus looking forward, the man in the loop becomes NGAD's weakest link. A romantic notion...if the flight management system were to monitor pilot physiology. It could limit the aircraft to fly only to the pilot's limits despite being capable of harder maneuvers. Couple enhanced manned aircraft performance with unmanned wingman performance...potentially potent. Especially with SEAD and other interdiction missions.
Thank you Scott, I think the NGAD and Raider will be the first of "optionally manned" combat aircraft. Perhaps use it in a crewed mode for super sensitive missions, and have it fly unmanned for routine reconnaissance or high risk missions such as SEAD.
@@PilotPhotog You are starting to ask a lot of this one airframe. Now imagine if you could afford as many as you want. What happens to the rest of the Army?
You want a suggestion for a name for the Air Force NGAD. I suggest, "Goodnight, Moon". Yes, it's 2 words and three syllables, but the concept is so apt.
If it even manages to get into Chinese airspace.. Don't forget that Both Russia and China have top tier AA defense systems.. And they are all MUCH MUCH cheaper than any fancy jet.
@@RED--01 And about twice as fast. I think, one single Iskander missile delivers as much explosives as an F-35. The F-35 just drops smaller warheads but more of them. But i don't know exactly, how much explosives there is, in a 2000lbs bomb.
Valkyrie In honor of the fighting spirit of America’s fallen heroes. In Norse mythology, Valkyrie would ride into battle or fly with wings over the battlefield to escort the souls of their chosen fallen warriors to Valhalla.
@@PilotPhotog wow, thinking that you make the 3d model, and the animation together with the good narration makes you a genius. Wow. Please make some more videos. ❤️❤️
Last comment - Why Mach 3+? 1. New stealth coatings can handle the heat. 2. The long narrow F-111 had a total after burner top speed of Mach 2.5. Remove all surfaces that do not contribute to lift, increase thrust 140%-180% (using F-22 & F-32 numbers) then increase altitude to say 70K FT - it’s not hard to see that Mach 3+ over the Pacific is not only possible, but desirable. Haha - I wonder if Lockheeds work on the X-59 is working into their NGAD submission? Remake you video with some of these ideas. I think what you have is the proof of concept design - smaller single engine one-off and not what they are actually going to submit.
Based on the supposed location of the weapons bay, what if it had one large center weapons bay with a rotating carriage like the B-21 Raider? This would allow it to use one small center door to deploy a weapon, and still carry a whole slew of different weapons, selecting whatever it wants to use when needed. The large central infrastructure of the carriage could actually be internal structural framing and fuel storage, with the large rotating carriage around it.
That's the best idea I've heard yet, good one. I have to say, as much as I hate war I get super excited about military tech. We're in an exciting time.
Weight. Not only would a large-diameter rotating weapons carriage be heavy solution (even without being wrapped around a fuel tank), it would be structurally weak, so you'd need very strong lateral load-bearing-beams across the top of the fuselage, adding even more otherwise unnecessary weight because of their structural inefficiency. And weight is the enemy of just about everything in a high performance aircraft. In my opinion.
@@dl6519 One of the weakest points in an aircraft tends to be the rear, where you have a large open bay supporting the weight of an engine that can weigh several tons. If a rotating carriage had center tubular framework to maintain a rigid structure up the center of the fuselage, it would be in tune with how every high performance aircraft has been built in the past, while also accommodating fuel storage. The only question then, is how to run the intake ducting around that area to ensure proper air flow and internal bypassing for supersonic flight.
The F-35 is getting the “Sidekick” to increase capacity for internal weapons; NGAD will get the same or similar capability depending on the winning contractor.
The way i see it is NGAD and SR-72 darkstar are identical except the former has a tailfin while NGAD doesn't . So stablization will be different and the flight control computer will have to factor that into account. Of course both aircraft will have divergent features and forge their own development path. Like NGAD which have secretly flown, darkstar is rumored to exist despite being portrayed as a fictional aircraft only in Top Gun movie
I would like to know how this thing is going to fly? Removing the vertical stabilators may improve stealth, but how are they going to compensate? I´m not convinced...
Great update! Can I buy your ngad model? I’d love to turn it into an RC flyable. You can see others I have done on my channel so you know its not a scammer 😅
Some other great names for the fighter would be Torrent, Banshee, Vampire, Warlock, Condor, Baron, Zombie, Wolf, Coyote, Rattler, Python, Adder, Maelstrom, Executioner, Sheriff, Constable, Sky Demon, Warden, Cyclone, Spirit, Ghost, Avenger, Scout
I believe The NGAD might have a 20mm Vulcan cannon just like every other fighter after the Vietnam war. However If the plane is that size then the gun might only carry about 400-450 rounds of ammunition.
To be fair, I've seen some concept renderings showing a larger, two-seater version. I will have to update my model for my next NGAD video. Thanks for commenting!
": RADAR " is antique compared to what is available today for detection . Many countries are adopting 'light detection' modules . A permanent beam of light that when penetrated emits a warning where the penetration occurred . Inexpensive and easily maintained with a minimal force on the ground protecting and maintaining it. Need to know more ... ? ....
Could you make one of the drones a tanker to refuel the others then do back to get more fuel and put a destructive explosion to destroy its self in case it goes down if it gets seen or to use its self as a look like it destroyed itself to make them think that it got hit and the others to leave the area in a hurry
I would be that the ngad air force is more likely to 3 engine than 1. And much more likely to be able to carry 8 aim 260 than 4 as well as 4 of the aim 9x .also likely to have 2 or even 3 aircrew because of the workload between airframe and drones. Now with a data link you could put all 3 into pods in Arizona like drone pilots. I do believe that the outline we've seen is much more likely to be a single engine either 50% or even 33% mockup of the final design as a proof of concept for the system of systems. Similar to have blue and the f117.
Just don't make the mistake the pentagon did in V iet Nam with the F-4. F-4 was 2 Huge Engines w/Wings, optimized for Missiles AND NO GUN. The Lil very maneuverable MIG's could kick their azz in a Dog Fight. SOooo if Take-Em-Out-At-A-Distance is the game - better make damn sure they can.
What is going to explode your minds, is that they are working on a cold engine design, meaning the exhaust will be cold or very close to ambient temperature, not hot. That will change everything in air dominance, it will also have more thrust to weight ratio.
If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: ForThePeople.com/pilotphotog
I think the beak is probably? The same style of 2D tv system as on the F22. . .
Stealthy
And agile!
And I think the V shape is meant to bounce radar waves away to other angles than they came from, kinda like the rear shape of the B2 😊
I already listed a few ideas, however what I really wanted to talk about is The SR-72's name!😅
Instead of Son of Blackbird I think it should be The Dark Phoenix! Way better name, the program like a Phoenix rises from the ashes, stays with the "Dark" theme from pop culture, it'd be an homage for the Mach 5 AIM-54 Phoenix, and for all the comic fans! The SR-72 Dark Phoenix!👍
Names for NGAD--
Terminator, Hunter, Starlight, Venom, Magician, Skynet, Legion, Predator, Firehawk, Ghost Shell, Diamond Dragon*, Nexus*, and Indoraptor!👍
Scorpion
Good names:
Glaive
Ballista
Mustang II
Black Widow III
Peregrine
Gyr Falcon
Golden Eagle
Silver Hawk
Nightshade
Estoc
Hitman
Arrow
Rush Limbaugh
As others have said the NGAD won't have a single engine and will be much larger.
I will add that it almost certainly will be a TWIN seat plane. One pilot and one drone operator.
America is building this plane to fight in the Pacific over areas many thousands of miles in size without suitable airstrips. Range, speed and longevity are top priorities.
Yup
Yup Yup
Is a double engine more fuel efficient even at the expense of fuel space? Or is it just for the redundancy?
@@c0mputaradds performance and range. Bird can be bigger and carry more. Supercruise can probably be guaranteed. Especially if the adaptive cycle engine programs pull through. And perhaps most importantly dual engines provide more power for onboard systems which is becoming more and more important.
Excellent point and completely makes sense, especially given the vast ranges in the Pacific. For this video, I tried to stay true to the image that Lockheed released, but I am already working on a follow up with a larger version of this jet. Thanks for commenting!
Name: Crow, Raven, or Corvus
Reason: in concert with its drone wingmen, the NGAD is basically the center of a flock of these birds and flock of Corvus birds is a "Murder". and evocative name and given the Corvus' reputation for intelligence as well, it seeks to fit.
Wonderful suggestion and explanation!
agreed
Raven was already used for the EF111
@@cristianocollarin2236
Wait... the F-111 "Aardvark" (Easy to remember because it is so damned strange but likely named for its long-ish schnoz)? A Variant? Wouldn't EF-111 "Raven" be like the F-16 being a nicknamed "Viper" (a name shared with the AH-1z), and not "Fighting Falcon" as it is official callsign?
There's also Rook, Jay, Jackdaw, and Magpie in the same family to pull names from.
For the name, I was leaning towards Owl (or some variant thereof). Reason being that the focus here is on stealth and being able to take down the target before they even know what hit them. The owl, among all other birds of prey, is noted for being silent in flight and capable of ambushes even in densely packed forests. So much so that owl wings are a major study topic in biomimicry for reducing noise in fans, wings, helicopter blades, boat propellors, etc.
Anytime you have an engineering problem, look to nature. It usually has already solved it.
My guess is 2 adaptive cycle engines on a large frame with no legacy control surfaces. Almost like a flying wing/delta wing hybrid. Extended range for Pacific theatre. 2 seater w/ability to be flown remotely in high risk/high altitude missions. Ability to command and control drones. Designed with next gen weapons in mind.
This precisely what Binkov's channel has said in their coverage of this platform.
@@swedhgemoni8092 Binkov is a sock puppet. You realise he has a hand up his...Entry?
I see no reason for a manned aircraft at all. These planes could be flown from anywhere on Earth. Also removing the crew would allow the aircraft to maneuver at forces well above a sustained 10Gs, the human limit.
If two truly stealth fighters meet in aerial combat, it may quickly break down into a gunfight so the most maneuverable plane wins.
My favourite name for NGAD would be "Phantom III". It's Name would be a warning for every adversary: you're the prey, I am your curse!
Yes. This thing will be virtually invisible, especially within a swarm of drones.
but there is also an f-4 phantom that is not similar to ngad
Now you are just superstitious.
I would call it Raven. Ravens have black feathers, they blend in especially at night. Ravens are incredibly intelligent birds capable of sharing their knowledge with their offspring. They've been observed making and using tools to accomplish their goals. I think this is quite fitting for a stealth aircraft that communicates with its own drones.
Raven is already in use. Its the name for ELINT aircraft of any time and would be confusing.
Considering the Viper name is just a nickname for the F-16(it’s officially Fighting Falcon) I think Viper is appropriate. Plus it kinda looks like the Viper in Battlestar Galactica.
Interestingly one of the original proposed names for the F-16 was the Viper due to the orignal BSG show being on the air at the time in the late 1970s. The name was rejected because a general famously said that he didn't want a fighter to be named "after some snake" The pilots and maintainers continued to call it the Viper anyway, and there is an award given to the top F-16 pilot each year which has the name Viper in it. Officially it is the "Fighting Falcon" but the latest F-16, the F-16V is referred to as the Viper. Here is a video I did about the F-16, including a the story of the naming with the full quote from that general: ruclips.net/video/0P5Xmas0Lkg/видео.html
I thought snakes are for Choppers
@@DOI_ARTS AH-1 Cobra agrees with you. I need to do a video on that copter.
Werent their names taken from north american tribes?@@DOI_ARTS
@@Camilo_Z yes of course Apache, kiyowa, comanche, blackhawk and my favorite Iroquois. Hmm I mean they code the Cobra and Viper (not sure but I think they are in Huey family so they are Iroquois) cant wait for Thog to tackle about helos.
My favorite Lockheed product is the F-104, so my vote for the NGAD name goes to Starfighter II.
Mine as well call it widow maker if we're talking F-104
YF23 was way ahead of its time
Im hyped as hell for both NGAD programs. If they truely have adaptive cycle engines theyre going to be game changers.
Call me crazy but I think the Darkstar was a preview of the NGAD more so than the SR71 successor. Regardless I'm excited to see the new generation of fighters.
Successor huh 😂
Mach ten, open the payload bay, oops the wind took the rear half of our airplane off. sorry, mom, not coming home today....
NGAD won’t be a single engine , no chance
I have on good authority it will be one and half (1.5) engines
It could still have two, just one exhaust pipe.
@@WolfeSaberThat's my bet, Photogs model probably isn't far off, just a bit smaller than the likely result.
2 shrouded engines, Twin seat (Maybe tandem)
What if it has one huge engine?
It will have no engines, it'll run on Lockheeds stock prices
The grooves down the sides of the fuselage are very interesting, I’m pretty sure those are being used to provide some of the aerodynamic stability lost with the removal of vertical stabilizers.
That stability helps in straight lines, but how do you "return to base"?
Nice job on the CGI model, but no way this will be their NGAD prototype. It's too small and the single engine design won't meet the range requirements for NGAD, which are much longer than the F-22 and F-35.
I believe this design is more likely to be one of the NGAD X-Plane technology demonstrators that Kendall revealed a few weeks ago.
Good points and I can see it being a larger and possibly two seat aircraft, I will make a follow up video with an updated model.
@@PilotPhotog Yes, hunt those clicks.
The NGAD, in that design concept, looks like the fabled F-19 Ghostrider without vertical surfaces. I vote the F-47 Thundershadow, because with the A-10 still in service I can't see a Thunderbolt III!!
If this concept is similar to what the real thing is,the jet could be more of a delta wing fighter.
Good Artwork, but I believe it will be about twice the size shown against the Drones and directional controls will use engine bleed air to aid in maneuverability akin to the Hawker vent ducts. It will have huge internal stowage.
Yeah, like room for two hypersonic missiles or 4 lrasms. Or whatever the future badass missiles are that we haven't been shown yet.
I can't imagine that they would leak the even the general shape of this plane until it publicly revealed.
I think it should be called, “The dagger” because it resembles something that can pierce anything.
The NGAD will be highly integrated with the B-21 Raider. Bomber, drones, and NGAD along with the F-35 will work as a team to achieve air dominance. A dog fighter or extreme maneuverability is not the primary goal of this platform (ex the legacy P-51 mustang is WAY more maneuverable than any current jet fighter aircraft, but wouldn’t stand a chance in modern air combat warfare).
I vote to call it the Sabre, Shadow, Savage. Too bad Reaper has already been used.
Highly integrated with stuff that flies half it's speed? And they probably out-turn it at low speed. WHY WOULD YOU EVEN DO THAT? It's supposed to go HIGH and QUICK for mIssile dispersion and Interceptions. This is not the F-35 program. the "One Plane does it all" stuff. If it would be that, with all those requirements, you would see the DoD go bust before it is paid.
It looks like it might be the fastest combat aircraft we've seen in a long while. If they have the right materials. I wouldn't be suprised if this ends up being a mach 3+ capable aircraft.
It will be aerodynamically unstable. Most electronically-stabilized aircraft are not fighters, more bombers that are sub-sonic.
Expect a few accidents in the flight test program while they rediscover the laws of areoynamic stability. Again.
@@alant383 Both F22 and Gripen is aerodynamically unstable, and they both doing supersonic with no problem
@@matsv201
Most fighter aircraft are at least marginally unstable to make them more manoevrable. But they can still fly without electronic flight stability aids, just like the F-18A/F (with difficulty). But aircraft like NGAD and B21 etc tail-less aircraft are completely aerodynamically unstable, not at all manoevrable and difficult (or impossible?) to land in a strong cross-wind. You just have to eject - a very expensive way to fly an aircraft.
@@alant383 F22 and gripen is totalt ustable. There is video of both losing there stability
If it has to be named after a bird, Raven is always the first that comes to mind.
Yeah, I like Raven or Peregrine. For some reason, Howler pops into my mind as well. I’d like to see a plane named the Howler, lol..
Nah, it must be a bird that annoys the heck out of you so you get aggressive. Especially one that you can't see. That is the association (and basically the Job of this airplane).
I think wraith would be a suitable name for the NGAD considering the level of stealth technology that it will leverage.
Yes, that lever will have to rest on a solid fulcrum. Like Physics. Directional signaling and Electromagnetic suppression/stealth might be a factor. Maybe they should build it from Plywood. Let's not forget that "Stealth" or "The RCS-reduction of certain shapes" was calculated by a sovjet scientist, in the 40's i believe. During the 90's Lockheed bought a ton of old Yakovlev patents and paperwork. Because Yeltsin the Drunk Bear had sold out the Industry to USA (Remember cheap fuel)? Yet Russia Never put a Stealth plane into production. Have you wondered why they only did so, AFTER the USA did? Because they remembered the Realities of the cold war. No matter how stealth your plane is, It can't fly forever. And an ICBM has no problem hitting an airfield. And even the biggest Bombers don't have the firepower to "first strike" a country into submission. It is either conventional warfare or "Game Over". And "game over" is bad for MIC-Business.
Morgan&Morgan where you lose your house but with a smile on your face :)
Specter. Also I don't see something with "Arid Dominance" in its acronym giving up maneuverability/range/payload... think this platform is going to be a lot bigger than that and my reason is the Pacific Ocean's size. As far as weapons go if they go with something like Peregrine you get a full AMRAAM in have a half size package. I see that being more useful than a jet that can go really far and only carry 4-6 AA Missiles. Just my 2 cents.
Great video. Please more on the NGAD- topic!! And by the way: the shape showed by Skunkworks may also resemble the silouette of a single-engine test article flown or still flying in Groom Lake.
Phantom III. Paying homage to previous generations.
That would be very cool - I am actually working on an F-4 video
@@PilotPhotog will be watching!
I was also thinking Phantom III - here's another vote for that! 😸
Anyone remember the movie Stealth? I do. The NGAD has a similar design to the movie's AI drone design. Also this was in 2005....
Great work, Tog! There are so many systems designed or being designed for having advantages for success/combat, they're needed as everything is getting more and more complex and the capability to do more than ever, just fascinating. It's always what can be conceived, then made, then counter. I bet the warfare that is going on now, like in Ukraine, though they are given old stockpiles that are being used up, while those new weapons aren't used to the point of what is being revealed, since the other side(s) want to know the capabilities and weaknesses and how to counter and defeat them. That's just my guess.
I'm not too good at naming names, the only thought of I could come up with, by the overall design and shape is Assassin, since it looks more sleek and deadly.
Assassin could work, others have suggested Raven, Wyvern, Ghost, and Phantom II to name a few. Thanks for commenting, for being a member, and now you know!
@@PilotPhotog The F4 series Already claimed Phantom II and its' name predecessor the FH-1 claimed Phantom.
EF-111A were known as Ravens.
Now a Ghost with a flock of Ghost Bats.......Hmmmm
Sticking with Falcon bird theme; Peregrine?
@@paulzaborny6741 good points - Peregrine would be interesting.
Maybe Atheris would work.@@PilotPhotog
I really like how the rear chines above the engine provide yaw stability when all flight surfaces are centered, so yaw control is only done by the split rudders when needed.
I can't help but think that keeping the plane stable at low speeds (i.e. landing) is going to be tricky. Not much margin for error with in-line control surfaces, so unless AI does some kind of magic, this thing may be coming in fast and require some seriously long runways.
Maybe they could design a system that allows for vertical stabs to pop up and drop. Its never been done before but it would allow for both maneuverability with stabs up and stealth and distance with stabs . I mean they have fold in wings… why not try fold in vert stabs? The f35 did all kinds of crazy things… there needs to be something crazier a new game changer.
Speaking of likewise, the new Boeing airliner design with the ridiculous long and thin wing for high speed cruise (where do you put the flaps?), but plus truss-bracing with albeit some lift (not new, back to Bellanca in the 1930s). Can't wait until on approach at slow speed and icing occurs and the plane drops out of the sky cause they didn't learn lessons on the ATR-42/72 icing incidents/accidents?
@@iceebearhawaii1735 Boeing Airliner still has a rudder though. It CAN change direction when attempting a landing at slightly less than ideal crosswinds.
Just a few name ideas - Broadsword, Ghost, Shadow, Wraith, Archangel, Excaliber, Rapier, SkyKnight....
Wraith and archangel are sweet
All good suggestions, I believe the CIA's A-12 was codenamed the Archangel - and was made by Lockheed so I could see this being the Archangel II. Here's a video I did about it, and how the CIA came up with an ingenious way to buy titanium from the Soviets: ruclips.net/video/9mVXdo0QmPo/видео.htmlsi=swjJ_knVi9K8gVm_
@@PilotPhotog Why not call it Jesus? So everybody knows, Armageddon is here.
Thanks for the vid, nicely put together. Though I think it's going to have two engines and be significantly larger than you show here. For the future (Pacific theater) it needs to be able to carry larger longer range missiles and have significantly longer range. It will need more size for that. IMO.
Excellent points on the range/size requirements - I will start working on an update video!
Interesting concept - just don't land in a strong cross-wind! Vectored thrust can only do so much for you. Taking off will not be easy either.
It is an understatement that stealth and low observability will come at a cost of manouvreability. Just don't expect good outcomes in a traditional arial dogfight.
cool video - thanks for making me aware of this super amazing project. As for a name, my suggestion is "Wraith" - mostly because it sounds cool and kinda goes with it's intended use (IMO)
Another great post Juan, I suspect the NGAD's significant departure from current operational "stealthy fighter" designs, means NGAD is more aerodynamically unstable than its predecessors. If so, logically that leads to need for a flight management system of superior capabilities. Thus looking forward, the man in the loop becomes NGAD's weakest link. A romantic notion...if the flight management system were to monitor pilot physiology. It could limit the aircraft to fly only to the pilot's limits despite being capable of harder maneuvers. Couple enhanced manned aircraft performance with unmanned wingman performance...potentially potent. Especially with SEAD and other interdiction missions.
Thank you Scott, I think the NGAD and Raider will be the first of "optionally manned" combat aircraft. Perhaps use it in a crewed mode for super sensitive missions, and have it fly unmanned for routine reconnaissance or high risk missions such as SEAD.
@@PilotPhotog HA! Right... so many possibilities. The extension of man/machine interface conjurs imaginations. 🤔
@@PilotPhotog You are starting to ask a lot of this one airframe. Now imagine if you could afford as many as you want. What happens to the rest of the Army?
What's the alpha-numeric designation. That's what I want to know. Also, who is the aerospace company behind the NGAD? Is it Lockheed? Or Martin?
Great questions - I could see either F-24 or F-36 for the designation...or the could just go F-45 to get back into the forties...
You want a suggestion for a name for the Air Force NGAD. I suggest, "Goodnight, Moon". Yes, it's 2 words and three syllables, but the concept is so apt.
Man that 3D model looks PERFECT
It is a bit on the nose, but I would call the NGAD "Dragon Slayer" as the Chinese J20 is called "Mighty Dragon".
If it even manages to get into Chinese airspace..
Don't forget that Both Russia and China have top tier AA defense systems..
And they are all MUCH MUCH cheaper than any fancy jet.
@@RED--01 And about twice as fast. I think, one single Iskander missile delivers as much explosives as an F-35. The F-35 just drops smaller warheads but more of them. But i don't know exactly, how much explosives there is, in a 2000lbs bomb.
I played this game back in the 80s on the Commodore 64. The game? F19 Stealth Fighter by Microprose.
Yes, the Graphics were Blocky enough for that one.
The YF-23 was ahead of its time
Valkyrie
In honor of the fighting spirit of America’s fallen heroes. In Norse mythology, Valkyrie would ride into battle or fly with wings over the battlefield to escort the souls of their chosen fallen warriors to Valhalla.
I like it, but I believe there is already a Valkyrie drone - thanks for commenting!
@@PilotPhotog Honor of the fighting spirit of America’s fallen heroes by driving the US into bankruptcy!
Could it have variable canards?
It is possible, the Navy concept FA-XX shows canards, check out this video on it: ruclips.net/video/j0bjSn8XJfo/видео.html
What about NGAD Dart or Dagger ? I know its already been taken but by 2 older fighters that are no longer in service.
Such a very very very good video, narration and of course the 3d plane craft model.
Thank you! I make these animations myself, much appreciated
@@PilotPhotog wow, thinking that you make the 3d model, and the animation together with the good narration makes you a genius.
Wow. Please make some more videos. ❤️❤️
@@alexequinox8774thank you very much! I am already working on the next one, be on the lookout for the Chrome F-35!
Excellent work PP.. your created visions help us to get excited..thank you
Thank you, and thanks for being a subscriber!
You need to get out more. LOL
@@Gunni1972 true.. work, sleep and repeat
Ive been waiting patiently for a Mustang ll.
It looks like the "high-speed mode" from Flight Of The Navigator!
“It changed its shape!” Totally agree.
CGI mate, almost same level.
A great name for the NGAD fighter would be Archangel
Nice 3-d model.
thanks!
What about vert stabilizers/ rudder?
Pfffysics
Last comment - Why Mach 3+? 1. New stealth coatings can handle the heat. 2. The long narrow F-111 had a total after burner top speed of Mach 2.5. Remove all surfaces that do not contribute to lift, increase thrust 140%-180% (using F-22 & F-32 numbers) then increase altitude to say 70K FT - it’s not hard to see that Mach 3+ over the Pacific is not only possible, but desirable. Haha - I wonder if Lockheeds work on the X-59 is working into their NGAD submission? Remake you video with some of these ideas. I think what you have is the proof of concept design - smaller single engine one-off and not what they are actually going to submit.
Based on the supposed location of the weapons bay, what if it had one large center weapons bay with a rotating carriage like the B-21 Raider? This would allow it to use one small center door to deploy a weapon, and still carry a whole slew of different weapons, selecting whatever it wants to use when needed. The large central infrastructure of the carriage could actually be internal structural framing and fuel storage, with the large rotating carriage around it.
That's the best idea I've heard yet, good one. I have to say, as much as I hate war I get super excited about military tech. We're in an exciting time.
Weight. Not only would a large-diameter rotating weapons carriage be heavy solution (even without being wrapped around a fuel tank), it would be structurally weak, so you'd need very strong lateral load-bearing-beams across the top of the fuselage, adding even more otherwise unnecessary weight because of their structural inefficiency. And weight is the enemy of just about everything in a high performance aircraft. In my opinion.
An absolute point!
@@dl6519 One of the weakest points in an aircraft tends to be the rear, where you have a large open bay supporting the weight of an engine that can weigh several tons. If a rotating carriage had center tubular framework to maintain a rigid structure up the center of the fuselage, it would be in tune with how every high performance aircraft has been built in the past, while also accommodating fuel storage. The only question then, is how to run the intake ducting around that area to ensure proper air flow and internal bypassing for supersonic flight.
The F-35 is getting the “Sidekick” to increase capacity for internal weapons; NGAD will get the same or similar capability depending on the winning contractor.
I always wanted there to be a real Air wolf 😂 but since it was a helicopter i would call it the Wraith
Beautiful presentation. Spot on!
The way i see it is NGAD and SR-72 darkstar are identical except the former has a tailfin while NGAD doesn't . So stablization will be different and the flight control computer will have to factor that into account. Of course both aircraft will have divergent features and forge their own development path. Like NGAD which have secretly flown, darkstar is rumored to exist despite being portrayed as a fictional aircraft only in Top Gun movie
I'd name it The Hydra, with the possibility of up to 5 drones per NGAD plane you will have a plane with many heads.
Love your music.
I would like to know how this thing is going to fly? Removing the vertical stabilators may improve stealth, but how are they going to compensate? I´m not convinced...
Great update! Can I buy your ngad model? I’d love to turn it into an RC flyable. You can see others I have done on my channel so you know its not a scammer 😅
Our boy is getting sponsors 🥰
Shadow or Hand would be good names for the string pulling NGAD.
Odin's two ravens, Hugin and Munin (Thought and Memory) come to mind. Both good names. Beautiful names for flying sculptures of death.
The Penetrator would be a good Name for this magnificent aircraft.
11:12 isn't the name's ngad
unveiling is something else than what this is about.
This was very good content! Thank you.
They could call it Rapier as the F22 was called unofficially before final production.
Can the new NGAD fighters shoot backwards?
I thought that silhouette was of the single engine, small concept for the SR-72 that has alr es ady been delivered (rumored).
Some other great names for the fighter would be Torrent, Banshee, Vampire, Warlock, Condor, Baron, Zombie, Wolf, Coyote, Rattler, Python, Adder, Maelstrom, Executioner, Sheriff, Constable, Sky Demon, Warden, Cyclone, Spirit, Ghost, Avenger, Scout
A great name for the fighter would be "Another LM taxpayer Ripoff".
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp Beaufort T. Justice it should be called. While Lockheed is "the Bandit".
I'd go with the F33 Predator. Invisibility and advanced weaponry, just like in the movie. Hell yeah.
Hades (Greek) / Pluto (Roman) and Perseus had the capacity to be invisible and extremely destructive. Any of those monikers could work.
👍🏻🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸👍🏻
Nah, it must be something American with similar destructive Powers. Something like "Burgers" or "Stock Market".
It seems NGAD will be bigger than an F-22 thus 2 engines and 2 persons a pilot and drone operator and a larger weapons bay.
Pacific reach is critical.
Given it's slim and pointed profile the NGAD makes me think of the rapier slim but deadly sword!
Call it the Recluse.
Next video, do a SR-72 recap with a higly realistic flight model.
I believe The NGAD might have a 20mm Vulcan cannon just like every other fighter after the Vietnam war. However If the plane is that size then the gun might only carry about 400-450 rounds of ammunition.
To be fair, I've seen some concept renderings showing a larger, two-seater version. I will have to update my model for my next NGAD video. Thanks for commenting!
time to build it in Flyout cause it looks amazing
": RADAR " is antique compared to what is available today for detection . Many countries are adopting 'light detection' modules . A permanent beam of light that when penetrated emits a warning where the penetration occurred . Inexpensive and easily maintained with a minimal force on the ground protecting and maintaining it. Need to know more ... ? ....
Shh, they intend to paint it black.
I think a good name would be "Raven" - the smartest bird out there.
Your CGI version of "Lockheed's" "NGAD looks nothing like Lockeed's silhouette that you put up. Its a totally different wing.
Could you make one of the drones a tanker to refuel the others then do back to get more fuel and put a destructive explosion to destroy its self in case it goes down if it gets seen or to use its self as a look like it destroyed itself to make them think that it got hit and the others to leave the area in a hurry
How does no tail affect the plane?
Wow wow amazing video❤
Thank you my friend!
The Falcon is a good name, fast sleek, and stealthy . . . other birds never see it coming...
I would be that the ngad air force is more likely to 3 engine than 1. And much more likely to be able to carry 8 aim 260 than 4 as well as 4 of the aim 9x .also likely to have 2 or even 3 aircrew because of the workload between airframe and drones. Now with a data link you could put all 3 into pods in Arizona like drone pilots. I do believe that the outline we've seen is much more likely to be a single engine either 50% or even 33% mockup of the final design as a proof of concept for the system of systems. Similar to have blue and the f117.
Just don't make the mistake the pentagon did in V iet Nam with the F-4. F-4 was 2 Huge Engines w/Wings, optimized for Missiles AND NO GUN. The Lil very maneuverable MIG's could kick their azz in a Dog Fight. SOooo if Take-Em-Out-At-A-Distance is the game - better make damn sure they can.
What is going to explode your minds, is that they are working on a cold engine design, meaning the exhaust will be cold or very close to ambient temperature, not hot.
That will change everything in air dominance, it will also have more thrust to weight ratio.
Yes, it will also stop the air from expanding and pushing the plane forward quick. Brilliant. Physics be damned.
The silhouette that Lockheed released was not of the NGAD but the Darkstar prop they made for top gun
My vote for its name is the Wyvern
The Arrowhead
Well, I’m not one for acronyms but I’d call it, The Owl. Sounds silly until it’s behind you 😂
I would name it the “Dagger” seems appropriate.
I like the name the Dart like the F106 Delta Dart. It looks like a dart
I bet that thing is FAST
It is going to be a lot bigger than that simulation model as well
One vote here to call the NGAD the 'Sphincter', What it will do to opposing pilots will be amazing.
What? Let them ENTER?
I was wondering if passive radar was a practical idea.