Will the US ever consider exporting the NGAD/FA-XX fighters considering that the F-22 was banned for exports because of its technology?
I would expect so, and the FCAS/Systems Tempest to take up the export market for 6th gen fighters
NGAD Exports
Will the US ever consider exporting the NGAD/FA-XX fighters considering that the F-22 was banned for exports because of its technology?
I would expect so, and the FCAS/Systems Tempest to take up the export market for 6th gen fighters
F-22 was only banned by congressional fiat in the NDAAs/authorizations. They even banned just developing an export version. Who knows what the situation will be for NGAD. I can see it going to AUKUS/top US allies like Japan depending ok the situation with China in the 2030s when its fielded.
UK and Japan are doing GCAP together, and Japan in particular is still salty we wouldn't sell them the F-22 (which is why they're developing their own 6th generation fighter in the first place) so I really don't think either the UK or Japan would be interested in NGAD. Italy is also investing into GCAP and expects to order some, Sweden is in talks with Japan to join the project as well, likely similar to Italy as mainly a customer/investor.
FCAS is already a decade late (airbus CEO says it'll be mid 2040s or later) compared to the GCAP timeline.
I expect NGAD to be like the F-22 (not for sale) and then GCAP will dominate the export market with FCAS eventually entering service for France, Spain, and Germany in the mid to late 2040s but likely not being an export success due to its late entry into service.
Given that other countries now have parallel 6th gen programs export seems much more likely, even if it's still a slim chance.
They'd probably be monkey models, but still blow all the competition out of the water considering the tech and development behind the NGAD program(s) is higher and both have been around for a decent bit longer than FCAS and Tempest.
I hope it won't look like that, that looks absolutely ridiculous.
It is the natural evolution of aircraft. We have the technology to remove tail fins and complex shapes to increase stealth without making the plane uselessly unstable. Why wouldn't they make it that way?
It depends on what systems it has for stealth, DE, sensors and manoeuvre. The US wants to keep its DE advancements as close to its chest as possible.
I really only see AUKUS/Japan being given a chance to have them. Australia might not even want them because they hate strike capabilities and the UK might not want them because they love their own industry.
what is DE?
Presumably "directed energy" weapons (i.e. lasers), which at this point are a meme, and have a high chance of staying a meme for decades to come.
The thought process that goes behind Direct Energy is simply that we have seen a trend of improving power capacity these aircraft can offer. As well as various technologies that are electricity dependent.
More energy to use in some manner or another.
Energy fighters are here today.
DE is directed energy not necessarily directed energy weapons not necessarily lasers and only retards not in the know think it’s a meme
The UK and Japan are already collaborating on a 6th gen get serving a similar purpose on an almost identical timescale, it's doubtful either would be interested given the enormous investment both are putting into the project, even if there ends up being a capabilities gap.
Some explain to me the point of this mothership idea. What's the point of having a fighter that controls drones? Why not control drones from the ground in central us or at least from an AWACS? Is the 50 second signal latency so important that it's worth the billions to control it closer to the action? Plus the increased risk of having something to expensive in the war zone?
I don't get the risk to reward trade off. AI will be sufficiently advanced by the time this thing is ready to fly that the drones can control themselves.
You can do direct datalinks with the mothership. No, I don't mean with a cable (though that wouldn't be impossible), I mean that they can beam data back and forth to one another directly using relatively weak electronics that are nonetheless capable of cutting through interference. The problem with long range systems isn't that the lag, it's that they can potentially be jammed. But if a mothership is flying around with a pack of CCA's they can feed direct information from one another and vice-versa without any real risk of being jammed or remotely interfered with.
Also, the plane has to go into the warzone homie. That's what it is there for. Why build the plane otherwise? The idea behind the CCA concept is that you are affording the NGAD greater, distance (fuel depot), lethality (carries weapons or is a weapon), electronics capabilities, and can help intercept strikes/confuse radar and missiles aimed at the NGAD.
These augmentations in theory allow it more practicable uses where the brass are less afraid of the NGAD being shot down because it has a swarm of advanced supersonic drones there to help protect and augment it.
It just seems more cost effective to build 100 times more drones and not have the mothership.
Especially if we predict where military AI tech is likely to be in 20 years.
The NGAD seems like something that's a good idea today, but in 2035 will be outdated.
Out dated by what exactly? No one else is even close to the level of air superiority the US has. What exactly is happening in 2035 that makes NGAD a bad idea...?
Military AI. No need to control a drone with a pilot in the air.
I don't think NGAD is meant to control the AI directly, I think it's meant to be a sort of nerve cluster for the drones to do higher-tier data sharing and analysis for the drone AIs.
NGAD itself I don't think is going to be "piloting" the drones.
>No one else is even close to the level of air superiority the US has. What exactly is happening in 2035
China.
the "F-22 was never exported" meme has to stop
F-35 is selling like hotcakes and it is superior to the F-22 in basically every way aside from stealth (almost negligible difference) and maneuverability (all but pointless because of stealth).
you think LM/Boeing will just give up on the 6th gen market?
the only scenario where NGAD is not exported is if the F-35 gets upgraded into 6th gen status.
So why didn't they just export the F-22?
Because Congress has the tooling destroyed.
The tooling is stored, not destroyed
Even if the tooling was kept, the people who worked the lines no longer work there and some of the companies that did produce parts no longer exist and even if we had blueprints to reproduce an exact replica of the parts they were making, we don't necessarily have the trained workers to actually do it, and the entire process of retraining and getting these production lines back up and running could be ~3-5+ years and hundreds of millions of dollars and that's BEFORE we make a single new F-22.
Because there is no market for it with the F35 available. Cost per unit and per flight hour is basically double for F22 and given that 6g aircraft are already in the pipeline, for all prospective customers nobody is going to buy it.
Also congress.
F35 was far more openly designed and collaborated using several nations talent, unlike the f22, anon.
Most of the nation's buying them helped in some way.
Don't kid yourself the F35 is an American project, and the aircraft components are overwhelmingly American.
This includes the stealth body, main radar, FLIR and the engine. As well as the bulk of the code.
>F-35 is selling like hotcakes and it is superior to the F-22 in basically every way
It has 1 engine and a fraction of the service ceiling. It's a monkey model of the F-22.
If all those scifi requirements are met in reality, I would assume it will start as US only for the first generation.
FCAS/Tempest are going to be absolutely mogged by NGAD
Poland will probs get some
non of the other offerings will be 6th gen.
like 5.5 at best