What happened to F/A-XX?
>>65355519We are still waiting on the contract award to be announced.Boeing is the likely winner.
>>65355519It is allegedly going to be announced/shown off in October. Supposedly the F/A-XX is going to be shown off alongside the F-47 at the same time but that rumor has only ever really popped up a single time
>>65355552No they're not. The US is basically terrified of being stuck with a single manufacturer for the entire generation again like happened with 5th gen.Unless Northrup completely fumbles their pitch, they're the most likely winner.
>F-35 plant in Fort Worth, Texas>F-47 plant in St. Louis, MissouriWhere will the F/A-XX plant be?
>>65355704If Boeing wins, than supposedly it'll be made in St. Louis and if NG wins than it'll most likely be made near where the B-21 is made
>>65355747The Boeing facilities in STL are large, I'll grant that, but having THREE fighter jet final assembly lines in one complex sounds silly.
>>65355752It is, and it's a major reason why the USN isn't likely to select Boeing if given a choice.They don't want to be 2nd fiddle to the F-47 for the next 30 years.At NG they'd be the only next-gen fighter they make. And would be the prime customer, not 2nd to the airforce needs.
>>65355752They're expanding the STL facility to a huge degree and at the same time they're winding down the F-18 production and eventually shuttering the line once F/A-XX goes into full production. So STL will at most have 2 seperate airframe assembly lines, not 3
>>65355767My count is three after F/A-18 is shut if Boeing gets F/A-XX.F-15EX, F-47, and the potential F/A-XX.
>>65355771Anon, Boeing currently makes 1 F-15EX per month. And they plan on bringing that up to 2 per month in 2027. That's not an assembly line.
>>65355780That's still on average more than 90% of fighter jet production lines over the last 10 years.
>>65355780Potato, potatoe. They have dozens on order, last I checked. Also, your number (illustratively exaggerated as it is) probably just reflects the monthslong labor strike that happened last year.
>>65355792>Also, your number (illustratively exaggerated as it is) probably just reflects the monthslong labor strike that happened last year.Its been the reality since 2025. Granted that's mostly due to the Air Force just not really ordering them in large enough orders to warrant an assembly line of having 10+ being made per month:https://www.flightglobal.com/archive/2026/05/latest-f-15ex-acquisition-plan-would-move-boeing-to-full-rate-production/
I am retarded, but I want to see F-47's infiltrating Russian air space with F-15EX's launching AIM-174B's at Russian aircraft located by the F-47's. Throw in some F-35's doing DEAD.
>>65355830AIM-174B is just a stopgap until AIM-260 is in full rate production.AIM-174B realistically is a flying telephone pole.AIM-260 meanwhile is AMRAAM sized.AIM-174B still has limited use in extreme long range lofted flights against tankers/AWACS i guess.
>>65355859Off-topic, but I read Red Storm Rising in the spring; Tom Clancy is kinda dumb in hindsight. He has F-19's (fictional stealth fighter) firing short-range A2A missiles at Soviet AWAC's from DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH them. Why?
>>65355869I mean, if you COULD get that close undetected, it's a great way to save some money, but at that point just spray some 20mm at the wing and be done for a couple thousand dollars.And at this point since we know stealth isn't 100% invisible, you're just going to launch a long range BVR missile. It's just not worth risking a stealth fighter at visual range when a heat seeking missile is going to ignore that radar cross section anyway.
>>65355917He has the Soviets losing basically all their AWAC's on day one alongside hundreds of fighters. Few chapters later, apparently NATO can barely fly behind the frontline.
>>65355668They left NGAD with the understanding they would be eliminated if they didn’t. The only argument anyone has for why they should win is that they haven’t won a fighter in a very long time. >>65355752They have over a million square feet of new assembly space being built right now, specifically designed to build their sixth generation fighters at scale. They’ve built multiple other facilities for component production on their own dime since 2023. That is very attractive to the government, as they both don’t have to help pay for new production space, and more importantly don’t have to wait years for it to come online. One of the last statements Caudle made on F/A-XX was that only one company was positioned to execute the program on the desired schedule, and given the circumstances it very likely wasn’t Northrop.
>>65355978>They left NGAD with the understanding they would be eliminated if they didn’t.What the fuck source do you have for that?They left NGAD saying they were focusing all of their efforts on the F/A-XX program.
>>65355978>They have over a million square feet of new assembly space being built right now, specifically designed to build their sixth generation fighters at scale. They’ve built multiple other facilities for component production on their own dime since 2023. Boeing leadership making good choices that reflect positive long-term outcomes? Am I dead?
>>65355995What about the F-117's on day one of Desert Storm?
>>65355704>Where will the F/A-XX plant be?Detroit, Michigan
>>65355982https://www.twz.com/air/f-47-revelations-were-just-dropped-by-former-air-force-secretaryThat is what Warden told Northrop shareholders. That they were going to be cut is straight from the mouth of the former Assistant Secretary of Acquisitions for the USAF, Andrew Hunter. Remember Northrop did not participate in the demonstrator program, they are very far behind. Meanwhile by way of Vago Muradian we have had rumors that Boeing was the clear sixth generation favorite since 2023.
>>65356209Pretty sure that’s a fake picture. There is talk of it being adapted for naval use but there’s been nothing to suggest that work is particularly far along.
>>65355869Because passive > active. And as far as I’m aware, the US has never designed a passive radar guided AAM (except for that one HARM that nailed a B-52)
>>65355984They're currently shooting themselves in the foot with the Air Force trainer so who the fuck knows what's going on with the military side of Boeing
>>65356315The trainer is not actually Boeing's design, they're essentially pitching to be the domestic manufacturer of a European (I think Saab?) design
>>65355668>The US is basically terrified of being stuck with a single manufacturer for the entire generation again>The US is terrified of having the best fighters in the world for yet another generation.An "it came to me in a dream" moment.
>>65355764>They don't want to be 2nd fiddle to the F-47 for the next 30 years.They already buy fewer fighters (see the F-35C) than production capacity allows.
>>65356440F-35C is the "lo" portion of the hi-lo mix.F/A-18 and the F/A-XX are the "hi" mix.Also they've continually been bumped on the lockheed roadmap for YEARS, they'd have loved to have gotten more F-35Cs earlier, but at this stage there is little reason to when they already need something new and better to replace the F/A-18.
>>65355859AIM-174 and AIM-260 are in completely different classes and target sets
>>65356445>F-35C is the low>F/A-18 is the highAnon I...
>>65356445The Navy has never been in a particular hurry to get more F-35s. Something like half of the operational carriers still need a refit cycle to be able to operate them last I recall. They’ve not wanted to do large buys before Block 4 is ready, because the Navy is perpetually broke and doesn’t want to pay upgrade costs later. They also do their best to offload F-35 buys onto the Marine Corps whenever possible due to said budget issues. The Marines have generally obliged and last year changed their planned procurement split from 353B/67C to 280B/140C.
>>65356483NTA; IMO, the VTOL capability isn't worth the trade-offs.
>>65356505The choice for most of its operators is between buying the F-35B or not having a stealth fighter. It’s like comparing an F-15 to a Harrier. That the Harrier gets its clock cleaned by an F-15 doesn’t matter to the numerous western navies operating small carriers, because an F-15 would be useless to them
>>65356535Here is my take that makes my previous take make sense. Most countries shouldn't operate aircraft carriers. France shouldn't. Russia shouldn't. The UK shouldn't. Italy shouldn't.
>>65356547It’s a US program that allows we’re invited to. Development of the B was still worthwhile as it effectively doubled the number of deployable ships with 5th generation capability
>>65356576*allies wereGuess that’s what I get for not proofreading on the john
>>65356576The Royal Navy (and French and Italian navies by extension) should have saved their budget for surface combatants and giving some of the monies over for land-based aircraft.
>>65356590That’s debatable, but probably a topic for its own thread.
>>65356606Some Anon and I had a good talk about it last week. TLDR: Buy GCAP.
>>65356612I would wait to see what that program actually produces, at what price point, and on what timeline before I’d put any eggs in that basket as a customer
>>65356627E-e-eggs…?
>>65356612>buy GCAPSee you in 2045.
>>65356713Japan is pretty ruthlessly committed to the current timeline because they expect to need GCAP in a war against China, so this is one of the few aircraft programs that is likely to get done in a timely fashion.
>>65356738More realistically, japan has realized if they build a sizeable enough 6th gen airforce before china can, they can stop a war from starting in the first place.The only chance china pops off is if they think they can steamroll Japan/SK/Taiwan in the first 24 hours.GCAP prevents that from happening, even if it's only a few dozen airframes until the mid/late 2040s.
>>65356784>The only chance china pops off is if they think they can steamroll Japan/SK/Taiwan in the first 24 hours.So its not going to happen then? It is a literal impossibility for China to do this, they wont use nukes either. They would be no better off with a stealth fighter because all the damage dealt will be with cruise and ballistic missiles. Attacking all three at once is suicide. America will definitely get involved if Japan is attacked, same with worst korea. Them getting a 6th (actually 5th in all but name) gen fighter will do nothing to improve their starting chances.
>>65356802Correct, they'll do grey area escalations for the next decade or two and at most a short soft blockade that probably leads to quick international sanctions, and china quickly backs down because no one wants to start WWIII. Then we're in the mid 2040s and their demographics crisis kicks into high gear and any idea of a taiwan invasion disappears.
>>65356802>Them getting a 6th (actually 5th in all but name) gen fighter will do nothing to improve their starting chances.Also you don't know what 6th gen means if you're saying this.5th gen is identical to 6th gen, but 6th gen is designed with high electrical power output to run local AI compute, Sensor fusion processing, MUM-T CCA control, etc. GCAP will tick all of those boxes. The GCAP fighter FAR outclasses the F-35/F-22 in electrical power capability, to call it 5th gen is just saying you don't know what 6th gen really means (power and cooling).
>>65356738Japan wants GCAP sooner than later, that is irrelevant to when Europe will be able to deliver.
>>65356809>high electrical power output to run local AI compute, Sensor fusion processing, MUM-T CCA control, etc.I was talking about China getting the 6th gen, but go off fren.
>>65356814Japan will probably carry the program, like they've been doing for a while anyways.
>>65356809>5th gen is identical to 6th gen, but 6th gen is designed with high electrical power output to run local AI compute, Sensor fusion processing, MUM-T CCA control, etc.You fell for marketing given these are all existing 5th gen features.
>>65356816In that case you can rest easy, they're at a minimum ~15-20 years from a 6th gen engine, even the J-36 tri-engine stupidity can't get them enough electrical power to viably call it a 6th gen fighter. China is lucky to eek out ~50-80kW from a single WS-15 engine. Even with 3 of them that's just ~150-240kW for the whole airframe.GCAP is targeting 250-350kW per engine, for ~500-700kW for the entire airframe. Totally different classes of electrical power.For reference the F-35 is at ~160kW with the current hardware baseline, and could stretch that to ~300kW with future cooling system upgrades. So a J-36 at ~240kW might be decent compared to older F-35As, but it won't hold a candle to F-47/GCAP or future Block 4+ F-35s.
>>65356821No they're not.They're being TESTED on 5th gen airframes.None of those things can be utilized AT SCALE on a 5th gen platform.They can do single platform sensor fusion MAYBE with an additional drone.They can do light MUM-T, but they're not going to coordinate a full 6+ airframe drone swarm.They can do local AI compute, but it's a fraction of the compute F-47/GCAP are targeting.
>>65356819Considering they just gave the UK an 18 billion pound investment that offset the GCAP tranche investment over the next 4 years (8.6 billion pounds), it's pretty obvious japan is driving this ship.
>>65356827>None of those things can be utilized AT SCALE on a 5th gen platform.Which will become widespread in the 20 years before GCAP enters service.
>>65356738Fast, cheap, good pick two.
>>65356959No one said it would be cheap.In fact some industry experts are hinting it'll be in the $250M+ range. They're already talking about ~$55-65B in development costs before a single jet is built.
>>65356962250M is a lowball if they intend to even approach competitiveness with other projects. Germany’s recent Eurofighter order is already in that ballpark on a per unit basis.
>>65356988You can't use those orders as a baseline, they include a fuck ton of extras like spare parts, supply chain/logistical shit, training/simulators, munitions, extra engines, etc. If you want to talk about realistic ORDER pricing when you include all of that ancillary shit as well, then yeah GCAP will likely be pushing $350-500M depending on exactly what a nation is buying in their order.
>>65357001That’s the realistic price, yes. The just the plane price is what you tell the media to keep them from freaking out and trying to torpedo it on cost basis. Sixth generation will be 3 airframes/billion if the program runs smoothly, 2/billion if it doesn’t.
>>65357020Sure, but you're buying a lot more than an airframe at that point, you're buying airframes AND their supporting infrastructure. If we're talking in that pricing then even chinese jets go into the $80-100M range. The F-35 is ~$180-250M. The Rafale is $150M+, even Gripens are $150M+.
>>65357028Which is the realistic price, yes, and what should be used. Price/airframe is a useless metric if that money does not buy you a useable airframe. There’s a lot of dick measuring about who can contort themselves to claim to lowest price but it’s the more realistic total cost that will determine if it is feasible for export and if economy of scale will ever take hold for the original partner nations.
>>65357041Yeah but it's also a poor metric since some nations are autistic and buy 2 engines for every single airframe, and other nations might just buy a dozen extras for their entire order.Some nations might buy 10 training/simulators, others 2.Some nations might have to pay extensive training/logistical contracts for their maintainers to learn how to work on the plane, other nations already have the training/know-how to do it themselves. Some nations buy a massive amount of munitions in certain orders that are for their wider fleet, it's just logistically easier to tack it onto a large jet purchase at the same time.Unless you really dig into the details of the contract, you can't easily use the contract $ value divided by the airframe totals and expect that to be consistent across the entire landscape of nations buying jets.
>>65355747>The winner...Why not both?
>>65357067Because then you end up with a shitshow like LCS. The only option worse than buying the losing bid is buying the losing bid AND the winning bid.
>>65356827> None of those things can be utilized AT SCALE on a 5th gen platform.Sensor fusion is why the F-35 exists as it does.
>>65357080Yes, for itself.6th gen is about using multiple CCA platform sensors to fuse a MUCH wider scale image.There is even talk about using multiple CCAs spread across 25-50km to create a giant "virtual" synthetic radar aperture. As well as cross-bistatic radar to break/heavily degrade enemy stealth utility.
So LM makes F-35s/upgrades F-22s, Boeing makes NGAD/F-15EX. That just leaves NorthropGRUMMAN to make another big cat for the navy right?
>>65357098Questionable. Their major focus was on B-21 in the last decade, while Boeing and Lockheed were working on sixth generation fighters. They are not known to have built a demonstrator while their competitors did, and the Navy participated in that demonstrator program. They are known to have been the weakest NGAD bid, and it isn’t clear if they have spare infrastructure for production, while Boeing has nearly finished building their own, on their own dime. This is very relevant, as Northrop has gotten a $4.5 billion package recently, ostensibly to increase the max B-21 production rate from ~10 airframes a year to ~12. Though it’s likely at least part of that was to compensate for the large reach forward losses they took on B-21 for the government, and more importantly the acquisitions officers who have staked their career on this, to be able to claim the B-21 is on time and under budget.
>>65357098Northrop is not hurting for aircraft orders.
>>65356826GCAP is targeting 250-350kW per engine, for ~500-700kW for the entire airframe. Totally different classes of electrical power.Dats hilariously large amount of electricity in terms of aviation engine. Where did you see that number from? Do you think F47 will get same capability of electricity generation?
>>65357338The XF9-1 was already doing 180kW as a traditional electrical generator in 2018 with a known target for the F-X program being 200-250kW.The RR E2SG program was doing 1MW+ tests (using a much larger commercial jet engine), we know RR is integrating this technology in the GCAP engine meaning we're likely looking at a MINIMUM of 250kW per engine, maybe more.And yes, the F-47 is likely even higher since they're going for a full 3 stream variable cycle engine and they can dedicate a massive amount of bypass air to cooling, which allows much higher electrical generation. From what i've heard the XA102/103 engines are likely targeting 400-500kW+ for approaching or even surpassing 1MW in total electrical power for the airframe.The biggest bottlenecks for these systems will be cooling, which is why they're expected to use highly advanced cooling systems that use the fuel as a heatsink and pump fuel around as efficiently as possible through the aircraft wings in order to keep things cool for high electrical power output.
>>65357384>using jet fuel as coolantCan't see anything going wrong with that
>>65357094It sounds boring and gay but The Future is literally just spamming shit tons of unmanned air/sea/ground/undersea platforms that can all do sensor fusion shit and also all or mostly all act as loitering munitions or launch platforms for loitering munitions and which are also all controlled or linked by an AI platform. Stealth will be a thing of the past since the whole earth will be blanketed in these things constantly scanning in basically all parts of the spectrum all the time.
>>65355859are we going to be able to write the words "your mom's dildo" on the side of the gunslinger? or is the air force still a bunch of suits in pants so tight they can't fart without a seam rip?
>>65357945What the fuck will the 2011 Libya's of the future even be able to do?
>>65357785It's already done today, the SR-71 used the fuel as a heatsink 50+ years ago. But GCAP and F-47 are using wild phase change metamaterials and other cutting edge tech to provide as much cooling in as small a footprint as possible. They're taking the fuel as a heatsink concept and turning it up to 11.
>>65358042Nothing.Though it's looking more like the US and Japan are going to be the only two building this capability anytime soon.The mass sensing cloud requires higher tier CCAs (equipped with AESA radar), Japan is currently developing an ISR/EW CCA that will fit this role.Italy and the UK however are looking to leverage off the shelf American or European CCAs which will almost certainly NOT be large expensive AESA equipped drones.Without those radar equipped drones you're not doing fancy virtual synthetic aperture radar things, or bistatic cross radar techniques.
>>65357785Highly refined jet fuel is actually really difficult to combust and requires really high temperatures to get the combustion process going.
>>65357945>stealth will be a thing of the pastRetard, the side that had that exact swarm combat but with lower RCS return is going to win against the side that has the same swarm but without any measures to make it stealth.How many times do you retards need to be knocked over the head with it before you understand that stealth is not and never was about being fully invisible to the enemy?
>>65357384>The XF9-1 was already doing 180kW as a traditional electrical generator in 2018 with a known target for the F-X program being 200-250kW.>>65358090Though it's looking more like the US and Japan are going to be the only two building this capability anytime soon.All sounds gud but just kinda weird bringing japs along. We all know them comparing to existing aviation powerhouse nations has ZERO record of inventing fighter jet engines since WWII nor seeing their indigenous stuffs battle proven. Given its records in aviation, if the only dev plan about XF9-1 back from almost 10yrs can prove its advancement, then the following yrs of silence w/ any visible intel is more than enough to neutralize any anticipation.Do you have exclusive info about XF9-1 other than that? It'll be exciting for us to see.
>>65358528There was tons of public data, it all got classified and scrubbed from the internet when the ATD-X program finished, and then a 2nd round of scrubbing happened again when they merged the F-X program with Tempest to form GCAP we know today.There has been zero public info since then because it's part of a trinational highly classified development program.We can look at Rolls Royce's public engine development efforts over the last 20 years and see exactly why they NEED japan's XF9-1 engine.RR stopped all military core development in 2010/11 when the F136 was rejected. They spent the next decade almost wholly focused on commerical jet engines. It wasn't until the XG240 digital design they even started looking at military cores again, and that design never got past the digital simulator stage.The XF9-1 is the only modern engine any of the 3 partners have access to.
>>65355978Considering how quality decayed their civilian aviation program is, I would be wary about any Boeing statements about their production capabilities.
>>65358528Japanese have the intelligence and culture to be bootstrapped up to the capability. Europeans are no longer trustworthy to partner with in such technology. They've already threatened more than once to become satraps of the Chinese.
>>65357384I have a much easier solution for 6th gen electricity generation - a separate small turboshaft generator. You do realize that these expensive R&D programs are a goal in themselves, not a means to generate a viable product?
>>65357384>which is why they're expected to use highly advanced cooling systems that use the fuel as a heatsink and pump fuel around as efficiently as possible through the aircraft wings in order to keep things cool for high electrical power output.I am sure this will greatly benefit the IR signature of these planes. >>65358075>They're taking the fuel as a heatsink concept and turning it up to 11.This is going to work fine until the plane is perforated by a tiny fragment from a nearby missile proximity fuze detonation and suddenly this super hot jet fuel doing double work as coolant is exposed to oxygen with predictable consequences.
>>65356826>>65356827You don't needto write like thisall the timeit's quite distracting andunnatural, please fit yoursentences about the sametopic together instead ofyour phoneposting format.thank you for your attention to this matter
>>65356612The GCAP is NGMI.>but JapanJapan is not a major military power nor do they have good military engineers.
>>65356826The GCAP is never going to produce that much power.
>>65359275>>65359287>>65359296>>65359308>>65359319
>>65355668Northrup has the B-21 and the nuclear arsenal upgrades, they’ll be fine.
>>65355869I've explained it separately in relation to the real F117 program in a few other threads, but on paper America didn't have any other option for an air-to-air missile that a stealth jet could use without emitting at the time. The straight up shot is because Clancy's fictional F19s need to do their penetrations at treetop height and because a shot from below was best for early (Vietnam era) IR missiles to avoid heat clutter from the ground. This would be true all the way up to AMRAAM adoption.IRL America actually probably did have some slightly better options, but very little is known or confirmed about them in the public domain.
>>65360093No one is worried about them going under anon, the US doesn't want to put all of the fighters under one roof again.
>>65360154And most of the fighters in service with the US military are made by Lockheed.
>>65360150You are giving Clancy far too much credit, the first all aspect Sidewinder entered service at the end of the Vietnam war.
>>65360399Yes, that's the point.They don't want that to happen again with 6th gen, which is what would happen if they give F/A-XX to boeing
>>65360442That statement still applies even if Boeing wins F/A-XX.
>>65360093They also have various drone and satellite contracts as well. >>65360399>Boeing: F-15, F-47, F-18 (Going to be replaced by the F/A-XX)>Lockheed: F-35, F-16, F-22 (not in active production and going to be replaced by the F-47)It's a healthy mix of industry knowledge and capability being spread out, but I also think that having the entirety of the 6th gen program go to Boeing is a stupid mistake. Ideally, I think the F/A-XX should go to a combination of both NG and Boeing. But if they're looking for a singular provider for the F/A-XX I would prefer it to go to NG unless Boeings' airframe is just that much better than NGs
>>65360464Northrop has a pretty bad record in recent fighter competitions and is fucking up more major programs than Boeing currently despite getting no flak for it on the internet. It’s also not immediately clear they actually have anywhere to build the planes for this contract should they win
>>65357945That only makes stealth more important.>>65358090When will you retards stop imagining that Japan is a military engineering powerhouse?The only one that will exist for the next century is America.
>>65361294Then why is the US making deals with Japan directly on GCAP system developments and mostly ignoring Italy and the UK?https://defensemirror.com/news/35697/https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/united-states-japan-joint-leaders-statement/https://ipdefenseforum.com/2025/10/samurai-initiative-launches-new-era-of-japan-u-s-ai-defense-integration/The SAMURAI initiative (Strategic Advancement of Mutual Runtime Assurance Artificial Intelligence) is a formal project arrangement signed by the U.S. Department of Defense and Japan's Ministry of Defense.The US isn't going to the UK to make sure GCAP can talk to the US combat cloud network, they're going to japan.
>>65361356Because Japan is the leader of the GCAP.That doesn't mean that the GCAP will actually work or that it will be any good.Japan's claim to fame is that they were slightly more involved than the rest of the alliance on the JSF program.But the idea that you can take a bunch of second and third rate militaries and equal one good one is a fallacy.
>>65361729>Japan's claim to fame is that they were slightly more involved than the rest of the alliance on the JSF program.Wut?Japan isn't a part of the JSF program, they're an FMS customer.
>>65355519This is weapons board, can talk about the chinese plane in OP picture? it looks advanced.
>>65361781
>>65361792This whole thread is a bait thread, anon. And you just bump it up. I guess it is working as intended.
>>65361798There is legitimate discussion to be had about the F/A-XX and 6th generation platforms in general.The OP picture, meanwhile, is just pure bait from a pro chinese poster that is likely seething since 90% of the thread has not addressed the OP image.
Implessive
>>65361781There's not much to discuss regarding the J-XX since we know even less about it than the J-36. It's a nice made-up concept of a hypothetical naval variant though.The more relevant news would be regarding the recent purported sighting of a 5th J-36 prototype which seems to combine the DSI of the later prototypes with the trench style exhaust outlets of the first. Some PLA observers are also speculating that the aircraft will enter LRIP soon, but that's to be taken with a grain of salt.
>chinky spewing his shit script againGrim
>>65355519
>>65355869>Hide underneath for evading anything without look down shoot down capability>>65356302AGM-122 in theory
>>65363571Yes just like the J-20 it'll be in LRIP for 15 years while they figure out a new engine beyond the WS-15.
>>65355519>front hinge
>>65358881Boris, go get sodomized by a drone
>>65356302>the US has never designed a passive radar guided AAMWho wants to tell him?
>>65364394Tell him what? It's true.
>>65364448Every modern radar guided missile is capable of passive guidance.
>>65360093B21 isn't a fighterThey will not let NGs fighter skills atrophy, considering the other 2 are currently producing fighters also
>>65364692Northrop hasn't produced a fighter in decades.
>>65364692>letThat already happened over a decade ago. YF-23 had its design finalized in the late 80s
>>65364679Yes, but basically none of them use it.in fact, AFAIK there are zero confirmed uses of an AMRAAM getting a kill using HOJ.Even if it DOES switch to HOJ mode the moment it can burn through the jamming it'll switch back to the active radar seeker for terminal guidance.
>>65364708>there are zero confirmed uses of an AMRAAM getting a kill using HOJYou can count on one hand the number of air to air kills in the last several decades.
>>65364731> Of the manned aircraft engagements listed over the last two decades, the AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile) was responsible for a definitive, confirmed subset of at least 6 to 7 manned kills, plus potentially a few more highly classified or unconfirmed instances.> 2013: A Turkish F-16 used an AMRAAM to shoot down a Syrian Mi-17 helicopter that crossed into Turkish airspace.> 2014: A Turkish F-16 used an AMRAAM to down a Syrian MiG-23 fighter jet.> 2015: In a highly publicized international incident, a Turkish F-16 fired an AMRAAM to shoot down a Russian Su-24 fighter-bomber that briefly breached Turkish airspace.> 2017: A U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet shot down a Syrian Su-22. (Notably, the American pilot first fired a short-range AIM-9X Sidewinder, which was decoyed by the Syrian jet's flares; the pilot immediately followed up with an AIM-120 AMRAAM, which successfully struck the target).> 2019: During the dogfight over Kashmir, a Pakistani Air Force fighter (believed to be an F-16) fired an AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM to shoot down Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman’s Indian MiG-21 Bison. India later recovered and displayed fragments of the AMRAAM missile casing as proof that Pakistan had deployed its F-16s in the engagement.> 2020: During an escalation in Idlib, Turkish F-16s fired AMRAAMs to shoot down two Syrian Su-24s and one L-39 trainer aircraft in rapid succession.
>>65364770>>65364731And if you include other A2A missiles besides the AMRAAM the number quickly goes up to ~30-40.
>>65364708>they can do it but don't normally because active guidance is betterIs this supposed to support the assertion that America has no air to air missiles with passive radar guidance?
>>65364918If the primary mode is active radar guidance and it has no ability to be a DEDICATED passively guided seeker (even if the hardware is capable, the software doesn't support that type of mode) it effectively ISN'T one.In the above example that spawned this conversation, if your AMRAAM activates its seeker's radar it would show up on the RWR for the soviets. Which is why you need to be 100% passive to be used in that type of situation, something the ARMAAM (or any other american A2A missile) isn't capable of.
>>65364929You could save everyone a lot of time by just acknowledging you were factually wrong and moving on.
>>65364949Is this your own admission you were too afraid to write so you had to couch it as something I should do instead?I'm not wrong. America has NEVER put in service a passively radar guided air to air missile.Just because an AMRAAM in some theoretical universe COULD do it if you wrote it the software to do so, doesn't mean it ever has or will in the real world.
>>65364966You made a claim, got corrected on something anyone with the slightest amount of knowledge on the subject should have and are flailing because your autism won't let you be wrong on a Mongolian shadow puppet forum.
>>65360404And it worked really well. No issues at all.
>>65365529Yes the AIM-9L did in fact work very well.
>>65365521Except YOU are wrong.Just because it has a MODE that works WHEN THE OTHER MODE IS JAMMED, doesn't mean that mode is possible for use it any other time.You CANNOT launch an AMRAAM in passive seeker mode, that isn't a fucking thing.God damn, you're embarrassing yourself at this point, you're wrong, get over it. You came in all smug cause you thought you had a gotcha, then when I proved you were still wrong you've just doubled and tripled down because you're just a sad sack of shit.
>>65365716You're fucking retarded and it's been sad to read all of this.
>>65365716>acknowledge it can do passive guidance>twist yourself into a pretzel in order to say it doesn't count
>>65365774>>65365770Because in context, we're not talking about a missile that CAN do passive guidance, we're talking about a missile that does passive guidance the entire flight.Like I already said, in context a missile that uses it's own radar seeker isn't sneaky.The whole point of being passive 100% of the time is you never alert the target plane.
>>65365843You are trying to move the goalpost except it doesn't work because the context is the scene in a Tom Clancy book where a fictional American stealth fighter gets into knife fighting range with a Soviet AWACS in order to shoot it down.This is just getting embarrassing for you.
>>65365950How am I moving the goalpost?The context of the original post was in reference to red storm rising you dumb faggot.>>65355869>>65356302
>chinkshill op>look inside >intra-american aero shitflinging>gcap>day long argument about amraam seeker modesBetter than most of these go
>>65366094must be something going on in pooland, usually it would be shitted up by now
>24 hours bump>still claiming people who hates chinkshills are jeets Totally not butthurt at all
>>65355984The military side of Boeing is still pretty good.It's the public facing part of the company that is fucking up.
>>65369805>The military side of Boeing is still pretty good-t. Boeing Salesman
>>65369808Hey kid, wanna buy an F-15EX Eagle II? I'll give you 5% discount if you order today, another 2% if you pay in full within two buiness weeks.
>>65369825Can i pay it with raw natural resources like coal, timber, etc?
>>65355519Don't think the US needs it anymore. The next 20 years are gonna be filled with more middleeast adventures anyway.And it would take money away from F-47 hangar queens.>>65355552Boeing being the winner would be incredibly scary and hilarious at the same time.
>>65356547If the US can operate 20, it's not unreasonable that the EU operates five or so.
>>65356547>russia shouldn’tThey already don’t, they haven’t had a carrier for years now, the kuz hardly counts as one.
>>65370120Yea not planning for the war against China sounds smart.
>>65356302>Gets killed by Sidearmok bub
>>65366094yeah I like it, autists actually talking about interesting shit instead of entertaining chink retardation
>>65370177the eternal conundrum>spend resources to prepare for low intensity sandbox adventures because they are much more likely than a near peer LSCO fight, causing critics to accuse you of being soft on China and inviting a conflict >spend resources preparing for a near peer LSCO fight that might not even happen, causing critics to accuse you of wasting money on expensive boondoggles and hangar queens that will just collect dust or get used to blow up hilux technicals anyway
>>65372159Meh, the R&D and technical developments we get from pushing the envelope in military tech trickle back into civil tech/engineering often enough that it's usually worth the money as an insurance policy, especially when we're talking about sovereignty. Far better to "waste" the money to insure your continued sovereign existence.
>>65363571>>65363586>>65363591plane with three (3) engines!? AHHHHHHHHHHHH
>>65373110Only one of those was the 3 engine one. The other has 2.
.
>>65370177Nigger what war against China?
>>65373555The one that will happen if the US decides to not plan for one.The only reason china isn't popping off is because they'd get bitch slapped if they did.If the US loses that ability to turn around and bitch slap china, then china has far less reason to NOT go to war for taiwan.
>>65373561Literal /k/edditoresque delusions. Nuclear countries never go to war with each other.
>>65373580Anon, if you think the US is going to nuke china for invading taiwan, you're delusional.We'll fight a conventional war for them (if we have the ability).Nuclear powers go to war all the time lately, and they don't touch the nukes because you'd be retarded to do that. If the US doesn't plan for an eventual conventional war against china in the pacific then china will have all the incentive they need to start one themselves.
>>65373593Financing 3rd world shitholes like Ukraine or Iran from the safety of a couch != going to war.>going to war a whole ass ocean away for a shitty island that 99% of Americans can't point on a mapThat's very stupid.
>>65373624Considering it's where most of our military chips are produced, it's non-negotiable for the next decade or two.Beyond that we can talk, but that still means the US needs to be prepared for a conventional war with china in the next 10-20 years.
>>65372164>ensure continued existenceLiterally noone inside the beltway is interested in this question. The F/A-XX is the perfect example. If push comes to shove the Navy would be the one doing the heavy lifting in the Pacific. Yet here we are with it being side lined for the F-47 that will get a balloon kill in 20 years if we're lucky. Consider how the US treated the Soviet Union. Regardless of which administration was in office, you had a standing planning staff for decades whose job it was to deal with the USSR. And sure they'd fumble the ball or get it right depending on moon phase, but the US doesn't even have a persistent China office which Donald Trump orJoe Biden could inherit each other.
>>65373770I live and work in the beltway and I know for a fact you're wrong.But sure, go off.
>>65373804Then you know exactly that 99% of thinktankies and Capitol Hillbillies couldn't define an actual threat if their lives depended on it. At absolute best you'll have a staffer that's late to work blame the russians for hacking the GPS of their uber driver.How much money their district/patron respectively gets is more important to these guys than actual national defense in real terms. Where is the chinese version of JSTPS that includes all the economic stuff that we never had to worry about in the Soviet days? (And don't say stratcom)
>>65373770>the US doesn't even have a persistent China office which Donald Trump orJoe Biden could inherit each otherNot that John Q Public would know if it existed.
>>65373580>k-kedditImmediately outed yourself as an angry tourist therefore nothing you say matters and your opinion is worthless kek.
>>65373561if you talk with actual taiwanese people (not NEET online losers), that fighting it out is not something they want to do even if "victory" is guaranteed:1. Maintain status quoThis is the most favored approach as they can keep profiting off of their semiconductor dominance 2. Peaceful reunification They have the ability to negotiate some favorable terms, still able to keep their economy going and provide a high standard of living similar to hongkong/shenzen.3. Fight it out and winAll their high-tech and ultra brittle economy is rekt, basically impossible to re-build. Mass flight of intellectual and economic capital. End up being a low-tier SEA country.4. Fight it out and lose.Same as 3, but now they can't leave and will be treated like shit by the CCP for resisting, like SEA Tibet or some shit
>>65374335Fuck off you're delusional.If we wanna go that route, like 80% of mainland chinese people see taiwan as cousins/kin, and don't want to see an active war.The Taiwanese people don't want a war either, but they sure as fuck ALSO don't want to be hong konged.Had beijing left hong kong alone and let them remain somewhat democratic then taiwan MIGHT have considered a peaceful reunification, but they've seen how that goes via hong kong and they have ZERO desire to repeat that.There is zero reality where taiwan accepts CCP rule peacefully as you envisioned after what they did to hong kong over the last 10 years.
>>65374335>impossible to re-buildTaiwan was a shithole island half a century ago, and I bet foreign investors would love to invest in people who already are known to be successfulChinks on the other hand will be eating each other figuratively and literally after the entire CCP collapses
>>65373770What kind of fucking retard would throw all their eggs in the Navy’s basket when they have shown zero ability to manage a major aircraft procurement program in what, nearly 30 years at this point? ATA was a disaster, A/F-X produced nothing, NATF led to nothing, UCLASS was very poorly handled before being turned into CBARS which is finally sort of producing something years behind schedule. The only feather they really have in their cap is Super Hornet, which is still fundamentally derivative. The F-47 is the priority because we can be reasonably certain that when all is said and done there will actually be an F-47, and I’m still not confident the Navy will actually produce an F/A-XX given the fuck around budget games they have played with its budget in recent years
>>65374335>don't fight back, just accept your CCP masters when they invade
>>65374344yeah, you dont know any Taiwanese people or been to taiwan. I've known dozens since they flooded by west coast city in 96 around the 2nd straight crisis and been to taipei/taichun/kaoshun for work.The ones with even a little economic/political power care more about their standard of living and investments way more than who's in charge. >>65374365foreign investors would invest in TMSC in the US or EU following a war, they'd never risk their capital by rebuilding in taiwan. US would pull the engineers out operation paperclip style given a 48h windows.
>>65374890>The ones with even a little economic/political power care more about their standard of living and investments way more than who's in charge.Yea, but ONLY if he person who is in charge isn't fundamentally rewriting the local political system with one totally foreign to you, and you literally just watched this happen in taiwan and saw how brutal the CCP police forces were since they were brought in from other regions.
>>65374890Not only is Taiwan the island is in itself a valuable resource, the people they're likely to return postwar like any other devastated country's people. This includes the companies.Such as it happened to japan and korea
>>65374890>i know people who stopped living in taiwan You can always gauge a country’s politics by its diaspora. This has never blown up in anyone’s face, not even once.
