Northrop Grumman’s teased 6th generation fighter hints that we haven’t seen the last of the manned combat aircraft.

The defence giant is best known for its long line of flying wings, including the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and the yet-to-be-unveiled Long Range Strike Bomber.

Northrop Grumman teased computer generated images of the new concept aircraft in a video shown below. The video shows a new mystery fighter flying alongside a few of Northrop’s already flying aircraft.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cITKk-DqYWE

This sixth-generation fighter initiative is loosely known as the “F-X program” for the USAF and the “FA-XX” for the Navy.

Northrop Grumman released a concept drawing of a new sixth-generation fighter design last year which matches this teaser. The Northrop sixth-generation fighter will reportedly be the first incorporate a laser weapon from the start.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
81 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Harding
4 years ago

A rather unconventional looking design.

Antonio J Santos
4 years ago

Vamos se sai melhor que os ditos 5 geração.só pepino e etc. – Lockheed MartinF – 35 e o F-22 Raptor.

Chris Duncan
4 years ago

Where’s the Yaw authority? 😛

Raj Seenath
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Duncan

Thrust vectoring?

Chris Duncan
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Duncan

The nozzles look 2D like F-22. No Yaw authority there

M'Dear
M'Dear
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Duncan

There might be a clue in what seems to be two exhaust jets being produced by what appears to be a single engine.

Michael Hynes
Michael Hynes
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Duncan

Split diffusers. Problem with thrust vectoring is that it can easily place the aircraft into a post-stall envelope, with a massive loss of energy. Best leave the super-manoeuvring to the missiles. Next gen aircraft very likely to have directed energy weapons as well.

jay
jay
3 years ago
Reply to  Michael Hynes

Not even close to delivering a directed energy power plant with effective lethality at range on a fighter platform, bud. Not sixth gen. Prob not seventh, either. Unless some paradigmatic change in energy production is developed in the next twenty years.

Simon Taylor
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Duncan

Split ailerons like the B2.

Ian Nash
4 years ago

I can make stuff up as well. Mind you my wont cost a trillion dollars lol. Still wish we would go back to designing and making our own.

UK Defence Journal
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

Sadly that would be too expensive, we’re better off contributing to larger programmes.

Pavel Neochotny
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

its gonna be ridiculously expensive anyway.that`s the way how to make money.. and the numbers of jets will drop as usual 🙂

Daniel Adams
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

The numbers of f35 havnt droped.

sammy jones
sammy jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Daniel Adams

true but costs have gone up and more and more debt added to the national debt.

Andrew Coulson
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

The f35 is the most expensive white elephant in defence spending history…. Massive overspend – a decade late, serious software issues and will likely be outdated when/if it comes to frontline service. Not a great product.

Greg Holden
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

I’m trying to think of the UK’s last independent military aircraft, never mind a fighter. It was a long time ago.

steve
steve
4 years ago
Reply to  Greg Holden

Buccaneer

Eamonn Roberts
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

Tsr?

Greg Holden
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

Or the Hawk? Nimrod?

Samuel McAdorey
4 years ago
Reply to  Ian Nash

Probably the Hawk.

Kent Reynolds
4 years ago

A rouse, and a decoy if you ask me. Any “real” new tech will be top secret. Besides, imagine a carrier or landing dock ship with over a thousand UAVs onboard. They’d be much more suited for the modern day theatre in urban areas and mixed with civies.

Jake Hayes
4 years ago
Reply to  Kent Reynolds

I don’t think uavs are the future manned jets will have say , they should integrate both of them.

Kent Reynolds
4 years ago
Reply to  Kent Reynolds

I respect your opinion, but the issue is “the human body” and G forces. The human body has limits to which modern fighters are exceeding. If taken out of the equation, a fighter could run circles around a manned fighter.
I believe it’s a matter of time…

Nick Amor
4 years ago
Reply to  Kent Reynolds

A valid point Kent. However, it depends on the current perceived threat as to which direction war fighting technology goes.
At present there’s no competing technology umongst the perceived enemies to make the removal of the human politically necessary.
For the present, there’s a need to keep the human in the loop I think.
But, as you say time may change that. 😉

Kent Reynolds
4 years ago
Reply to  Kent Reynolds

Nick…and without that “need”, the current service fleet should still dominate. The key piece of technology that has unleashed UAV technology has been Lithium Ion, driven by mobile phones and “increasingly smaller devices needing longer amp-hours”. That technology is still heavily invested in and being worked on…
If there is another breakthrough in cell technology, we’ll have drones everywhere and that’s the catalyst for UAV warfare.

Jake
Jake
3 years ago
Reply to  Kent Reynolds

Although that may be true Kent.. Even aircraft are limited greatly by g forces and would rip apart if they went above 12 G with todays air frames and most ‘drones’ are barely reach mach 1 at the moment.. Also with current technology and the fact the RAF have stated there is always a pilot in loop with a UAV, it would be difficult to dogfight or do much airiel combat compared to having a highly trained pilot on scene to look physically around with the mk1 eyeball. Sensors and cameras are not good enough in that kind of situation… Read more »

Adrian White
4 years ago

Warren White

Warren White
4 years ago
Reply to  Adrian White

Jesus… Current generation is still plagued with problems

Rob Lacey
4 years ago

Can’t even get a reliable version of f35
Fucwits

David Anthony Simpson
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

Irrelevant nonsense

Anthony Manuel
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

F35 is not from northrop grumman.

Hoffmeister Bear
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

According to Northrop Grumman’s own website…. Northrop Grumman plays a critical role in the development, demonstration and production of this multirole fighter, including: The production of the center fuselage… design and production of the AN/APG-81 AESA) radar, design and production of the AN/AAQ-37 (DAS), design and production of the AN/ASQ-242 Communications, Navigation and Identification avionics suite, development of mission systems and mission-planning software, development of pilot and maintenance training system courseware, and management of the team’s use, support and maintenance of low-observable technologies. Very much part of the design. Get real, this is an incredibly complex system, a quarter of… Read more »

Rob Lacey
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

Yes an thing that is correct
But I will refer you to the b2.. 2 billion dollars per plane and retired lol

Hoffmeister Bear
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

B-2’s retired?? Mostly true, apart from the 20 still in-service of the 21 built…

GB
GB
4 years ago

That’s why they cost so much, you’re paying for the development

David Anthony Simpson
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

Dont you jyst love ill informed rubbish…. and yet its not hard to find the truth nearby.

UK Defence Journal
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

Rob, boozed up?

Rob Lacey
4 years ago
Reply to  Rob Lacey

Lol

Mark Bannister
4 years ago

look they still got pilots hahaha .

david southern
david southern
4 years ago
Reply to  Mark Bannister

Yes, good point! So limiting the aircraft to 9.5g and adding an unnecessary 90kg for the pilot and about 250kg for the interface/windows etc. By 2030 we should see the first single crew commercial aircraft delivered.

Jake Hayes
Jake Hayes
2 years ago
Reply to  david southern

That isn’t a bad thing as such ucavs can be hacked and jammed easily.

Dave B Philips
Dave B Philips
4 years ago

Whilst there are countries with budgets exceeding hundreds of billions of dollars on defence, the next generation of all military hardware’s will be in the pipeline. Defence is all about being as many steps ahead of your prospective adversaries as possible. With a heavily media hyped but potentially accurate statements on a new cold war with Russia and arguably already one in existence with China and US, there’s likely to be a ramp up of new designs and concepts…

Chris Power
4 years ago

“”This is rubbish, we should have kept the F35″” ?

Jack William Millen
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Power

We can only hope and pray that everyone else will think the same

Ant Godwin
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Power

A lot of criticism of F-35 would have been avoided if the Harrier had remained in service until F-35 was ready to replace it.

sammy jones
sammy jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Ant Godwin

should have kept the Sea Harrier in service until the F-35 is in enough numbers came on board.

James Gale
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Power

The Harrier offered nothing for a Navy vessel. It was purely ground attack and the I Class were well beyond their prime.

Michael W
Michael W
4 years ago
Reply to  James Gale

Really,what aircraft were used in the Falklands conflict then?

Ian Pears
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Power

Really.? Go read up on the FA/2

Chris Power
4 years ago
Reply to  Chris Power

FA2…the last British Fighter, much missed, if only they could have worked out a way of fitting the GR7A/ 9A engine to it. The RAF could have stuck with Tornado (the correct decision for them) and the FAA could have carried on with its stand alone fleet to bridge the SHAR/F35 gap.

David Kitchener-Martin

This photo is taken from the si-fi film ” Stealth ” but as future aircraft design is maybe we will see simular shaped jets within the next few years.

Christian Rogers
4 years ago

Hmm no I don’t think it is. There’s no EDI and no Talon, so it can’t be from Stealth.
Although if you have citation id be very pleased.

Alan Radisic
4 years ago

It isnt

UK Defence Journal
4 years ago

Northrop Grumman created the computer generated image you see in the photo above, it’s from an advertisement they created recently and certainly not from a film.

Daniel Adams
4 years ago

To be fair it does look like the planes from stealth.

Alan Radisic
4 years ago

No swing wing

david southern
david southern
4 years ago

Looks like they’re still betting on radar not being able to detect stealth aircraft which seems a bit narrow minded for maybe 2035+

Frankie Hayward
4 years ago

James Punt

James Punt
4 years ago

No f15 f16 f18 tornado typhoon can do the job fine

Frankie Hayward
4 years ago

not when they cant see the planes and are getting shot at from and getting out manoeuvred by a plane that can carry more missiles and bullets

James Punt
4 years ago

It will be like this soon

Andrew Hill
4 years ago

Jowan Chapman

Joao Andre MArtins Dias

Why put a person inside?

Steve
Steve
4 years ago

I suspect it will be a long time before UAV replaces pilots in fighter jets. You can’t do dogfight style fights via link and so they will have to be fully computer controlled, and at least for the time being humans can out trick a computer.

If a day comes where fighters rely purely on beyond visual range weapons (lazor, plasma etc) then there will be no need for pilots, but we aren’t there.

Joey Palmer
4 years ago

Miles Palmer

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago

This is a bid for funds?

Vikki Ball
4 years ago

Very nice.

Ricomiguel XD J. Peresores

the next generation bomber!

Saurav D Artillary
4 years ago

THATS WHY US IS BEST AND EVERYBODY IS WASTE

UK Defence Journal
4 years ago

What a stupid comment.

Luke Sidaway
4 years ago

his just a troll

Skobok Skoby
4 years ago

Wow…. Reality???

Raymond Christie
4 years ago

Looks like Ax 17

Mark V Deer
4 years ago

Someone has been watching the film Stealth and taken the next step to try to build them

James Bartlett
4 years ago

Have they been in talks with the makers of Independence Day: Resurgence?

Mark Foster
4 years ago

I once drew a flying supersonic submarine with cannons all over it. It was ace. I was six. I won a curly wurly.

Narinder Singh
4 years ago

Excellent. But first you are going to need a phony made up war to justify the trillions of dollars it will cost…..still it will keep the shareholders happy……

Andrew Bailey
4 years ago

Don’t think it’ll be long before they will have an actual protatype built and flying.

Andrew Canavan
4 years ago

Its got a friggin “Lay-Zor”… Should we not be trying to make our 4.5 genelation fighters fulfil their promises before moving on to the next thing…?

Steve Altra
4 years ago

Mislabeled as a “Fighter”, this design would be more accurately defined as either a “Tactical Bomber” (in size only, due to its relatively small warload capacity) or even better, a “Regional Bomber”. The layout is not conducive for maneuverability, instead, being more optimized for speed (supersonic cruise), and a lower radar profile from the front. Also possess a lifting body layout, so a possible concept for a higher altitude (ie; edge of space) operational realm. The animation shows barrel rolls, which is silly, serves no purpose, no application in a bomber. It is highly unlikely that NG will receive a… Read more »

Chish
Chish
4 years ago

Ah so now its now NG’s turn to fleece the US Taxpayer of $ Billions after LM and the F-35 and Boeing with the tanker. Its like ‘My turn next’ on the US Military spending merry go round …

And for the record I think the F-35 will do OK as long as we are allowed to do OUR thing with OUR aircraft.