The U.S. Air Force has published a report featuring concept art for the ‘Next Generation Air Dominance’ fighter.
Most details about the aircraft itself,beyond a rough idea of how it might look, remains a mystery due to the programme largely being classified.
According to USNI here, the U.S. Air Force has said that NGAD exists to examine five major technologies that are likely to appear on next generation aircraft, with the goal of enhancements in survivability, lethality, and persistence. It has not specified what four of those technologies are.
“The one acknowledged NGAD-related technology is propulsion. Over the past few years, the Air Force has invested substantially in variable cycle engines. Other likely candidates include new forms of stealth; advanced weapons, including directed energy; and thermal management. The current engine on the F-35 and its variants expected to be on the B-21 produce a tremendous amount of electrical power that can enable new weapons. That could require advanced techniques to manage generated heat, so that it does not become part of the aircraft signatures and make the plane easier to detect.”
Describing the programme, the report says:
“Designed to complement the F-35, F-22, joint, and partner forces in the Air Superiority role, Next Generation Air Dominance is an advanced aircraft program for development of penetrating counter air platforms with multi-domain situational awareness, agile resilient communications, and an integrated family of capabilities.
The program uses a non-traditional acquisition approach to avoid traditional monolithic program schedules and exorbitant life-cycle sustainment costs. This strategy, called the Digital Century Series approach, creates a realistic business case for industry to adopt commercial best practices for key design activities – before a part is even manufactured.”
Background
In September 2020, U.S. Air Force acquisition executive Dr. Will Roper announced that the Air Force had flown a full-scale flight demonstrator as part of the Next-Generation Air Dominance programme.
The announcement came as a surprise to many observers, both as the NGAD program was believed to be an early-phase technology development program unlikely to yield hardware in the near term, and because funding began two years ago, which is unusually fast to design and build a military aircraft.
You can read more about the history of the project here.
Additionally, you can read more about the UK’s own next generation fighter by following the link below.
Seems like only last year they brought them into service
Looks like a shed roof …
Lot’s of airfix unveiled this year by world powers
I had a Westland Lysander and a Comet-the piston engined racer, not the jet
Won’t look anything like that.
What will it look like then ?
😂😂😂
Well I would say if it does look like that then I might just be, outside of the program itself at least, the worlds greatest expert upon its aerodynamic performance and flight.characteristics. Because as a kid I just loved taking those large left over polystyrene ceiling tiles splitting them down the middle diagonally and adding a couple of vertical fins and a bit of nose weight. They flew rather well though had a tendency to stall and nose dive occasionally and generally were lucky to last more than 5 or 6 flights without irreparable damage though I suspect material science… Read more »
Ha ha and Ha ha again !!!! lol, I too experimented with advanced aerodynamic designs based upon Balsa and Paper having long given up trying to get the Airfix stuff to stay aloft. ( why can a 15 ton Metal thing fly so far when a few grams of plastic just nosed dived Stuka style into the ground ! ) I also think Mr Musk is not very clever, how can he be when every test flight ends the same way ?
Look at a compilation of Musk crashes and you’ll see that with Falcon at least, there really is a happy ending!
Here’s to a happy landing (x-fingers) for SN15!
I am in awe of you sir, all those wasted polystyrene tiles I could have been launching into the air……what a missed opportunity.
My money is on it looking like an airplane of some description.
I believe it was the great Geoffrey de Havilland who said “if it looks right, it probably is right”. I may be wrong but that was in reference to the proto Mosquito, not yet flown but take a step back and look, just look . . it looked right. The F22 looks right, the F/A-XX looks right, the B-21 looks right. That thing in the header does not 🙂
that thing looks like an over stuffed turkey. how on earth is that thing gonna get of the ground?
I still don’t get what the F-35 was for then? The USAF have got their fighter, I thought the USN needed a carrier-born air superiority fighter i.e. F/A-xx. ? So now USAF wants a fighter-to-fighter? They are going to order 1,700 F-35s, where would this new righter sit? The former is already costing $1.7 trillion, where are they finding the money for this?
I guess the US is hellbent on turning the USD into monopoly money at this point, as they know they’re drowning in debt. Might as well ride that world reserve currency status, until the wheels fall off.
F35 is not an air superiority aircraft.
Joint STRIKE Fighter, not Joint Superiority Fighter.
With regard to debt, most major Western nations have more of a problem on that score than the US does.
US debt has reached 139% of GDP this year. That’s one of the highest in the world and most nations have significantly less in fact. During the pandemic the UK’s debt has reached 111% of GDP for comparison. The US does have particular currency advantages when it comes to borrowing admittedly, but its debt is huge.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
I think our debt went to 99% debt to GDP. America is cruising at 130%. However, they have debt out of their eyeballs. Corporate debt, household debt, student debt, credit card debt, state debt, etc.
By 2025 they’ll be heading for Japanfication at 191%. At that point, their world reserve currency status is pretty much dead. We should move back onto the gold standard before its too late.
USA also has a crumbling infrastructure that needs updating bridges,Roads,Railways and buildings they have not maintained. USA was happy to spend what it had and now cannot afford to replace what it has. Hence the tax hikes and cuts to services
Post-war UK debt was 240% of GDP! It was brought down to 100% of GDP by 1962.
So those record highs were not the end of the world moment!
As I understand things George, both the USAF and the USN require/want a air superiority fighter. I think that for the USAF it will eventually replace thecF22 despite what the article says. Indeed the USN released some renderings of their version the other week.
Seems to me that the F35 isn’t measuring up to the sum of all its parts (I know it’s not a air superiority fighter but has to fight other aircraft, especially where nations just have the one type of jet). Perhaps I’m wrong on that score, but, recent developments seem to point otherwise!
The Navy seem to want a replacement for the Super Hornet which means Air Superiority and strike missions and preferably two engines. The strike missions seem to be hovering around attacking less defended objectives (of itself or behind F35 defence softening) but rather significantly and importantly able to use greater range than the F35 and/or with greater stand off range weaponry because there are serious doubts about the long term practicality of the F35 longer term when the carriers are increasingly threatened by weapons that keep them at the edge of its range even with their current bomb bay stand… Read more »
Agree with all of this, truth be told, never saw the sense in only having the one engine for carrier ops, don’t think the USN went much on the idea either, as traditionally the vast majority of their aircraft have always been twin engines for obvious reason.
I don’t know if the two programmes will ever be able to merge into one type, perhaps the whole F35 venture has put doubt into too many minds. Time will tell, as will costs, so we shall have to wait and see what develops.
The USN Navy are really missing the legs that the F14 could deliver. The F18 doesn’t cut it as a fleet defence fighter. The USN are worried about the plethora and disparity of anti-ship missiles threatening the Fleet. The fleet defence fighter is hopefully going to correct the F18s short comings, especially range, thereby pushing out the combat air patrol ring.
It’s to compliment the F35, not replace.
“The Joint Strike Fighter program was intended to replace the United States military General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, A10,F/A-18 Hornet, AV-8B Harrier ll.
Vice President of Strategy and Business Development for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, predicted in 2006 that the F-35 would be four times more effective than legacy fighters in air-to-air combat, eight times more effective in air-to-ground combat, and three times more effective in reconnaissance and Suppression of enemy air defences – while having better range and requiring less logistics support and having around the same procurement costs (if development costs are ignored) as legacy fighters.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_development
Mind boggling science fiction stuff. From Kitty Hawk to this in just over a Century
Whats even funnier is a pattern Clerk in Switzerland dismissing flying machines as Pie in the sky while at the same time discovering Relativity and proving the existence of the Atom while two bicycle mechanics went on to invent the Aeroplane .
🙂 truth stranger than proverbial fiction!
I reckon if I was let loose on the crayons I could come up with something fancier with more missiles and stuff. Maybe a couple of gun turrets like the Millenium Falcon as well.
Lets just hope we stick to a deliverable design for Tempest with technologies that work. Ignore what the US is doing to a certain extent. Tempest needs to be a step up from Typhoon and at least on par with anything Russia or China can build. We don’t need to chase “next generation air dominance” in the same way the US will, which will no doubt come at a huge cost.
INdeed, we should not copy the US. But we need to admit, a flying triangle design is the future.
This looks to owe more design lineage to the F117 rather than the F22.
Yes indeed. Imagine a F117, but tighter and no tailerons. That’s the kind of design Tempest should focus on.
To be fair Rob, Typhoon, upgraded with Radar 2 and the other planned improvements is already better than anything China and Russia can deploy in the next 10 years. The Russians seem to be flailing about with troublesome expensive projects that don’t appear to be a huge advance on the Flanker series, particularly the excellent Su35. China is advancing very quickly however, with the money to ‘dream it, build it’ (then incrementally modify and fix), aka the J20, they are making extraordinary progress in aviation. The particular Chinese blend of Command and Market economic models, allows them to do this.… Read more »
Also engines, we are 2 generations ahead of them and they are having real problems catching up. The other great advantage we currently have is submarines.
Beat me to it presently they are trying to obtain more Russian engines u till they can produce something that not only produces the required thrust but can do so for longer than it takes the J20 to get into the air. That aircraft and others are simply hobbled by the reverse engineered engines. However once they do solve that years down the line and other problems they will be tough to match overall I fear. Their designs are certainly overtaking the Russians in airframes and capabilities.
Good point Andy, both the Russians and the Chinese are way behind in advanced power plant design and construction.
In the case of China, it doesn’t matter what blank cheque they might write to cover it, you simply can’t just make it happen, advanced propulsion is really the pinnacle of high end engineering and few countries do it as well as the UK.
Agreed. With what we have available to us now in terms of upgrades and the way things are shaping up both here in Europe and in the South China sea, I would have preferred it if we replaced the Tranche 1’s until the arrival of Tempest.
We could easily find ourselves in a shooting war before the end of this decade the way things are looking.
Radar 2
LERX ( designed and tested will excellent results)
Thrust Vectoring (available since 2010 with many advantages)
Conformal Fuel Tanks
Meteor (JNAAM should arrive by 2025/6)
Advanced EW counter measures(Digital Stealth-Leonardo Praetorian)
https://defense-update.com/20110209_typhoon_tvn.html
Clearly, we cannot compete with China on Ship numbers, but their is a cheaper and much quicker solution to the problem.
“A few months after having test fired a JSM from a US Air Force 416th Flight Test Squadron (FLTS) F-16C Fighting Falcon, Kongsberg now eyes integration on the Typhoon fighter aircraft. This weapon can be carried on multiple hard points on Typhoon, providing complete Role-Fit flexibility, explained BAE Systems.”
https://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/defense-security-exhibitions-news/air-show-2017/lima-2017-bis/lima-2017-news-coverage-report-bis/3367-kongsberg-s-jsm-missile-to-be-added-to-eurofighter-typhoon-weapons-package.html
Conformal tanks for Typhoon are dead and buried…they don’t work due to aerodynamical issues, confirmed by Airbus.
Interesting, do you have a link to this?
Follow the issues on the F18s. Have the same issues due to aero issues and leaks
JUST like I have been saying. We need to move to a flying dorito/triangle design for the Tempest. I got berated by commenters but here it is. The future is no tailerons, no canards, flying triangle, hydrogen, etc.
Makes you wonder why though… after all, most UFO’s are Saucer Shaped !
The Aurora secret aircraft that crashed in the UK is something to research. A flying triangle can be made long and thin, able to house a lot of fuel, no tail for better efficiency and take delta design to the next level. It could fly higher than the Typhoon, potentially hit mach 3. RR is working on mach 3 engines with Virgin Galactic. I hope people won’t berate me anymore. It’s coming lads. Best start being a believer now. Flying triangle, hydrogen, no tailorons, no canards, mach 3 capable, and internal bay missiles. When you think of it, its absolutely… Read more »
One story was that the aircraft that crashed at Boscombe Down in 1994 was a Lockheed Have Blue. However, that is disputed as only two aircraft were officially built and both apparently destroyed in crashes in Nevada during 1978 and 1979. One suggestion is that a third Have Blue was secretly built and flown until the crash at Boscombe.
I’ve not read any suggestions that was Aurora, which was actually a codename for the B2. I believe an Aurora type exists BTW.
The most credible reports of the Boscombe incident i have read was that it was actually a YF23 type, which should have been the winner of the ATF programme.
I have been advocating for a triangular design fighter. To be more stealthy, we could blow jet thrust through the control surfaces for cruising or deeper penetration into a hostile airspace. Of course, when the pilots need to make an aggressive maneuvre they can use the control surfaces conventionally. And we make rudder flaps on the wings fly-by-wire. This involves taking tech from BAE Magma and Taranis to the next level.
I think Tempest should look something like that in the attached photo.
Perhaps we could advance on the heat-absorbing tile technology that was in the YF23’s thrust nozzles?
No, that’s so 1940s and 50s.
Many “UFO” sightings are Triangular. It’s no coincidence. Plenty of FT sightings over the UK in the early 90s and one that Neatishead tracked from Belgium to the UKADR. Another flew over RAF Cosford.
And of course the 1990 Chris Gibson sighting of an FT refuelling from KCs over the North Sea.
If anyone wants any proof there’s stuff up there as yet unacknowledged the MoDs Own UFO report that redacted 2 photos of ongoing programmes will do, and articles from boom operators from the dedicated USAF Squadron that refuels black world aircraft.
I have no doubt that we have special projects cooking up as we speak. I just hope it can be utilised in our future aircraft and its not purely just as academic exercise.
Liquid Hydrogen will never be used as fuel for a fighter type of aircraft, due to the equivalent volume required compared to jet fuel. The much larger volume will require a significantly larger aircraft, at a minimum twice a large.
For now maybe mate, I’m sure some clever clogs down the line will invent a ‘you can’t bend it’ that will make it happen. Its kind of how things go.
For now yes. But with better tank technology etc, as well as the triangular shape to store more fuel, it will be the future. Hydrogen needs massive infrastructure change/investment, but Airbus is already planning for hydrogen commerical airline travel. It will become the future. It might not be in the first half of this century, but it will beyond 2050. Electric cars are now becoming the norm for goodness sake. Something experts throught would take until 2040-50. But tech is moving very, very fast nowadays.
Interesting layout.
Bit noddy the “V1 to n” idea of changing weapons, engines and components. That just looks like powerpoint engineering from a GCSE project.
Actually changing engines was so expensive in terms of design and certification for F35 they binned it. What revolution has occurred that would obviate needing to go through those processes?
As for new weapons, well blow me down with feather, what a unqiue concept to upgrade the weapons a combat aircraft carries…
This is like the published art of the F117 before it was made public.
It’s got some good points but from the picture’s angle a lot of bad points.
Should the air intakes be underneath the fuselage?
Yes, because the aircraft holds a flesh sack, it is designed to perform better in the positive g mode rather than the negative. As humans can cope with a higher positive g than a negative. The aircraft is in general designed around this, which is among some of the reasons why engine intakes are below the wing, especially for aerobatic aircraft like fighters. Putting the intake above the wing does have a stealth advantage in that the intake is shielded from ground based radar. However, depending on where the intake is placed, it will have a detrimental affect on the… Read more »
It looks like something from Ace Combat on the PlayStation 😄
Excellent post. Yes I don’t like the air intakes beside the cockpit in the Tempest mockup either. The F-35 has intakes beside but that’s because it needs the larger bay for bombs. Tempest is F2F, so I hope they change that. Makes the aircraft too fat as well. I think we should opt for a flying triangle, kind of like a F117, but much tighter, no tailerons and intakes that are flatter but underneath the fuselage. Because of the triangular shape, you can afford to flatten the air intakes, thereby reducing the signature. Maybe they want a stealthy fighter that… Read more »
The Tempest will Not just be F2F, but a multi-role fighter as well, like the Typhoon which it is to replace. The Tempest will most likely have internal bays like F-35 as well. It will be the professional aerospace engineers at BAES that will decide on the eventual shape of Tempest, Not You!
Could you put “meow” at the end of every comment. Sums up your petty contributions on this website.
Your reply to my realistic reply to your previous comment, sums you up as very petty person indeed!
I was just trying to tell you to you to
let the professional aerospace engineers at BAES to get on with their job of designing Tempest next gen fighter aircraft.
What the country does Not want, is out of control development costs!
Tantrums of a fantastic, it seems?
No, present thinking is to go side or preferably top, mostly for stealth reasons. Obviously the presence of a pilot(s) have a say in this.
You can’t fudge aerodynamics, the airflow will do what’s easiest or it will diverge and break up by separating and swirling creating wasted emery vortices and drag. Therefore, there must be a compromise to maintain the airflow to the intake, if this aircraft is expected to do aggressive maneuvers. Perhaps they’ll use large maneuvering leading edge extensions like those used on the Su57. These would help to try to maintain a laminar flow to the intake as well as providing high alpha lift and control. These undoubtedly will be less stealthy than a fixed leading edge, but airflow may be… Read more »
emery = energy – duh!
I agree, we’re talking about a air superiority fighter here, aerodyamics cannot be compromised too that extent. But maybe for a 6th gen fighter bomber, I’d agree with Spy, have them side by side but never on top.
Perhaps the USAF are trolling the communists?
Why would they expose the shape of this proposal at this time?
The shape is like a F117, which itself was not a fighter.
Yes, give them a Red Herring!
The most interesting thing is it apears to have variable vertical tails,down flat for maximum stealth and vertical for WVR.
Don’t get me started!
A solution without a problem? Unless the USA and the UK with FCAS can break the pattern of exponential cost growth, neither of these projects will achieve delivery.
The F35 is planned to stay in service until 2070, F22 until 2060. Looking at the history of F15,16,18, these dates are not unrealistic. So what gap in the inventory is this supposed to fill?
Employment Gap ? dunno really apart from the ever constant game of technical advancement.
The UK with Tempest, is supposed to be a replacement of the Typhoon multi-role aircraft. If the ambition is a 5.5 Gen successor to Typhoon, a product could be deliverable by 2035. If a more ambitious 6 gen successor is in process, it will be unlikely deliverable before 2040.
I doubt the fighter will have any vertical tails.
It does not seem to have a big enough nose for a high performance AESA intercept radar. It could be a stealthy attack aircraft to replace F-15E Strike Eagles perhaps?
I read Ben Rich’s book on his time with Skunk works & I wonder if this is one of the F-117 follow-ons that Lockheed offered the USAF in the 1990s, that did not proceed.
It’s a concept and hardly representative of what will replace the f22!
Interestingly the wing shape itself is not dissimilar to the F22 it’s just like the nose and tail has been squashed into it. I really do think that the demonstrator announcement last Sept was a combination of Trump hype needing to allay public fears they were falling behind Russia/China, what with their announcements of advanced projects to counter combined most like with in essence an F22 with a range of updates and general developments as a flying demonstrator enabling him to make that claim. The lack of any sort of informed renderings tend to back that up it’s the PR… Read more »
Have a look at the BAe image that went with the following link:
BAE develop tech to protect wideband receivers (ukdefencejournal.org.uk)
Have BAe let slip what Tempest may actually look like?
But isnt this just another rendering? This is where we came in…
Yes, but as concept art, the design is more realistic as it’s a better aerodynamic model, especially compared to the Tempest model BAe have produced and displayed.
How would US Bae be privvy to UK Bae’s Tempest design?
I know they are supposed to be separate entities, but I’m pretty sure there is a lot of communication between the various sites.
The BAe artwork is very similar to the US Navy’s F/A-XX programs artwork that has been released. Which I think is more representative of what is may be coming.
There’s a Chinese wall between the two arms of the company.
Highly likely.
I think this maybe closer to the mark given the results so far with Magma.
I’m unsure how much weight this might save, but a possible indication to the launch weights for a future EMCAT design onboard the carriers may hold the key compared to a conventional aircraft ?
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2014/05/whatever-happened-emcat/
Looks like Maverick’s ride in the trailer.
Notable in the report it says that this wont be a mass produced fighter but will be an iteratively upgraded platform in small batches, i.e. they would produce a dozen, tweak the design, produce another dozen, tweak the design and so on…
If you reduced the scale from hundreds to dozens its actually got a lot in common with British WW2 fighter development where they would continually iterate around an engine upgrade or tweaked aerodynamics.
I do not see the link or similarity with that.
Small numbers seem expensive, unless there is some new inexpensive, efficient way to build in penny packets. Not that many F22s were really built anyway.
This might give us a clue as to how this could be achieved?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cC3GNbEaz1o
It has been suggested that a prototype for the F-22 replacement may already be flying and also, a design concept for a F-35 replacement is well advanced. Knowing how the US military is constantly looking into the future, I can accept the idea that there must be a number of classified programmes that are actively being progressed at places such as Area 51 in Nevada.
The article does not discuss what is really at the heart of the USAF’s NGAD. (The US Navy is going is own separate way on a sixth generation fighter). The USAF no longer plans to have airplane manufacturers design, build demonstrators, and then compete for fighter contracts. The acquisition process will now split design, production and sustainment. Whoever designs an aircraft may not get the production contract and whoever gest the production contract may not sustain the aircraft in the field. Its a reallocation of roles and is designed to open Air Force programs to firms that aren’t traditional military… Read more »
Looks like the USAF finally got round to watching Battlestar Galactica.
my thoughts exactly, us = Cylon raider, tempest more colonial blackbird
The rendering reminds me a bit of the THAP ( Tactical High Altitude Penetrator ) design from the 80s, but with B2 shaped saw tooth trailing edges.
Looks like Cylon fighter from the 70’s show!
One should always remember these generations of aircraft design taken many years to fruition.We wii live in a world eventually where these craft will be robotic con trolled as the world heads into the 21st century.
One thing for certain theadvancement of air sea and land is gathering more speed now,as new threats emerge, being one step ahead.
Stabilty today instability tomorrow.
Don’t really see the point of the F35. Not really a stop gap, if it is, it’s a VERY expensive stop gap! B version is probably the most capable and practical. But we’ve paid up and are stuck with this pig. Don’t get why UK is stalling on buying more though because to fill 2 operational carriers and look credible, we will need more. Can’t fly anything else off them. We’re did we park those old but capable Sea Harriers again…….? I bet Cameron’s ‘cats and traps’ had the Navy brass drooling. Imagine that, a proper aircraft carrier that can… Read more »