NGAD contract winner to be announced next year according to the Air Force
Preparedness & self-sufficiency community
NGAD contract winner to be announced next year according to the Air Force
>It'll be fucking Boeing
Do they even have any internal engineering teams anymore? I thought they gutted all that to outsource to overseas design centers and all their own people did was check over the foreign made designs.
10 years ago while in college one of my friends was a boeing intern. She didnt know the chain rule as a senior. She said that she designed a bracket or something on the 787. My aerospace structures professor was a boeing manager, and apparently a big deal.
hopefully boeing doesnt get the contract due to their rampant gayry and anti americanism.
Bigotry is anti-American you buffoon.
which is why boeing is anti american.
you dumbfuck retard.
giving preference to employment based on sex to people regardless of ability is bigotry.
affirmative action is a violation of the 14th amendment,
>Groups of people that have been left behind until very recently
>How dare you lend them a hand
justify your racial and sexual discrimination how ever you want. you will never not be a racist and a sexist. and the supreme court is going to BTFO you this summer. normal people think in terms of individuals. racists and sexist, like you, think in terms of group identity.
you are disgusting and anti american
>you are disgusting and anti american
You wouldn't know what being American is even George Washington himself came back from the dead and fucked your prolapse AIDS-ridden anus into climaxing.
you "lend them a hand" by ensuring they can get the same level of education and the same opportunities as everyone else.
giving them preferential treatment is not "lending them a hand"
equity is fucking retarded. equality is the goal
>Same level of education and same opportunities
According to you that's anti-American practice and an attempt to force equity.
>two people apply for the same job
>we'll accept X because he's Y race, and Y race is inferior
>we'll accept X because he's Y race, and Y race hasn't had the same opportunities as Z race due to systemic oppression
>we'll accept X because he's the most qualified candidate
>Because y race is inferior
Yes, that is racism.
>Because Y race hasn't had the same opportunities
Not racism, but agreed that it isn't ideal.
>Most qualified candidate
That's the goal, yes. Unfortunately, righting the sins of our fathers is going to be a giant pain in the ass and likely a generational effort. Those who were denied opportunities should have them presented elsewhere if possible.
The reason AA is a chosen vehicle is because quantification of who should get what and when is impossible, but the positive effects for affected groups are notable. There are alternatives, such as the government funding education or certification programs equally, or actually forcing companies to pay employees appropriately, which the GOP detests as communism and won't allow, so AA it is.
lets get one thing straight right fucking now.
women are not oppressed.
and they are not a minority.
your policy goals are designed to give further privilege to an already privileged group at the expense of a disadvantaged group.
you are a sexist bigot.
It's only in the last few years they've been able to reach education parity. The fact that there's now an imbalance already has educational institutions now practicing preference for males to get it back to about 50/50.
They still, for the most part, have not reached parity in positions long held exclusively by men. This isn't hard, anon, the world exists beyond a set of strawmen and hyperbole.
Not being actively oppressed right this second does not negate that there's also cultural and social adjustments to make, especially when so many men still obsess with cultural expectations that aren't tenable or sustainable because that's what their fathers taught them.
>Need to be the breadwinner or I'm a failure
>Sewing? Emotions? Cooking? That's for people with no dick.
To the point of needing therapy if their spouse starts to out-earn them, because they were specifically taught that emotions are weakness and therefore are completely unequipped to deal with or talk about them.
Believe it or not, but you can acknowledge reality without worshipping at the altar of Marx.
It doesn't have to be, but like I said, the real solutions the left hates because they're real solutions, and the right hates because helping anyone, ever, is scary gobbunism.
>They still, for the most part, have not reached parity in positions long held exclusively by men. This isn't hard, anon, the world exists beyond a set of strawmen and hyperbole.
Because women don't want to put up with the lifestyle required to succeed in those positions.
Look at medicine for example, women (despite being a majority of med school graduates) are far less likely to become surgeons or cardiologists - why? Because those specialties require a shitton of overtime as a junior doctor and most women prefer the lifestyle flexibility of specialties like family medicine.
Or look at law, women consistently earn less than men from similar law schools - why? Is it discrimination? No, it's because women are much more likely to work for non-profits and NGOs than high-stress, long-hours commercial firms.
The generational effort already happened and failed, it's eternal effort now.
>righting the sins of our fathers is going to be a giant pain in the ass and likely a generational effort. Those who were denied opportunities should have them presented elsewhere if possible.
>Not racism, but agreed that it isn't ideal.
You're discriminating against Z because of their race. That's racism bro.
>That's the goal, yes. Unfortunately, righting the sins of our fathers is going to be a giant pain in the ass and likely a generational effort. Those who were denied opportunities should have them presented elsewhere if possible.
>The reason AA is a chosen vehicle is because quantification of who should get what and when is impossible, but the positive effects for affected groups are notable. There are alternatives, such as the government funding education or certification programs equally, or actually forcing companies to pay employees appropriately, which the GOP detests as communism and won't allow, so AA it is.
Get your inheritied sin bullshit out of here. An individual is not responsible for the wrongs committed by those who came before them.
The only moral choice is to treat people equally in the here and now, yes, it may take longer for blacks to reach the same level of achievement as whites but so be it, you don't solve a wrong with another wrong and that's what penalising innocents for the actions of their ancestors is.
Choosing a moron because he’s a moron is racism lol
making no one think they got where they are through merit isn't "lending them a hand", it's you exploiting their identities to advertise your virtuousness. see: college brochures
the fact they can't get there without your "noble sacrifice" of positions to them is either a) inherent lack of merit in a meritocracy or b) the system isn't meritocratic at all. the right picks a), the left picks b), but only neoliberals are retarded enough to pretend affirmative action could possibly work
Paper American detected.
I don't care about your passport.
You'll never be one of us. Go back.
Post Aerospace Engineering degree.
ad hominem and an appeal to authority essentially
>noooo you can’t just hold brown people accountable for their actions! We HAVE to punish Asians and Whites, and actively impair societal function by promoting under qualified wahmen
Nope, fuck off from my cunt. You leftoids fucks think you can get away with racism and discrimination, you ALWAYS fucking think this shit. Only solution is total Democrap genocide followed by removing ~~*corporations*~~ and Republicuck lobbyists from power
That's how the a lot of non-sensitive component designs are done. Sensitive shit is offloaded state-side. Boeing, LockMart etc. still make major design decisions, set the requirements for components etc. but they aren't designing every mounting bracket anon. It ain't all foreign either, a lot of it is subcontracting state-side. I don't have a positive opinion on Boeing due to the company culture brought by the dumbfucks that ran McDonnell into the ground who for some reason now run the company but to criticize them for subcontracting is retarded. Everybody subcontracts in the industry.
lol, lmao even
Northrop Grumman has the B-21
Lockmart has the F-35
Then NGAD for Boeing
On the other hand Boeing does have a fair number of other things like helicopters, transporter craft, drones and refuelers. So it's not like they are hurting.
There is the possibility of Lockmart getting the NGAD plane and then Boeing making the companion drone actually. DARPA gave Boeing 50mil~ to build unmanned vehicles that lack control surfaces just a few months ago. Though that does leave Northrop Gruman needing something else.
NG is getting like 150 b21s at a few hundred mil a pop
I suppose that's true but at the same time NG are the best of the 3 in terms of Space operation aren't they? ULA doesn't seem to have too much beyond SLS which is a dead end most likely, NG will probably be the Space Force's best friend in the future.
SLS will be the rockets that future major satellites will be launched upon. The Next Gen telescopes that will be launched upon it.
Boeing is working on the ghost bat drone with Australia that should be capable of operating with both navy NGAD and airforce NGAD. So I think Lockheed will likely get the USAF NGAD contract.
My guess is Lockheed for USAF NGAD, Northrop for USN NGAD (F/A-XX), and Boeing for wingmen drones.
not after that 737 max snaffu
Doubt it, they're still in complete shambles.
Fuck, at least its not Sig.
Northrup will get a pacific optimized version with high speed and stupid range. Lockheed will get the Europe optimized version with shorter legs but superior kinematics. I don't actually know that but I do remember them wanting to iterate and develop small batches of different aircraft quickly so idk if that's changed, it's possible the manned fight jet portion of NGAD is a few different platforms
comedy "General Dynamics" option
Never mind F-22's, never mind F-35's, how long will it take for more functional NGAD prototypes to be built than Su-57's exist?
They want them "in service" by 2030 so before the end of the decade
I would like to see that.
These things are building on existing B-21 and F-35 experience so honestly not that long
they're all gonna be doing major parts of the work no matter who wins
Boeing built their last fighter some time ago. Look at how much they are charging for F-15's. Air Force isn't going to give them a contract.
AA seems pretty irrelevant to the talk about Boeing anyway since their big issue is outsourcing to Indians which i'm fairly positive don't really benefit from AA.
>low effort baiting retard gets someone hook line and sinker
It's all so tiring... anyways, yeah the entirety of that shitshow was caused by the fucktarded culture the MD execs brought in, rather than being an engineering first company it became all about the Wall Street. Now don't get me wrong, I'm no commie, but investors rarely know what is good for the company. Moving away from being a solid engineering company led to the scoring that huge own goal. I hope they don't get the contract unless it really merits them winning because the fuckwits in charge now may be good at pleasing Wall Street but they sure as hell aren't good engineers.
Can I get a long rundown? QRD is fine, too.
Don't have time for a long rundown at this moment but just look up what happened during Boeing's "acquisition" of MD. Same execs that were too business focused and drove MD into the ground became the execs of Boeing. In essence, Boeing is MD wearing Boeing's skin. Company became less about solid engineering and more about giving the best return to investors. Shit like the cut corners with MCAS on the 737 Max and the slimy shit with the FAA. The attitude is even reflected in the company's locations. HQ got moved from Seattle, near the assembly plant to Chicago and things kept going downhill since. There should be documentaries on this stuff out already due to the 737 Max, never watched them though so I can't speak for their accuracy, I've heard this stuff directly from the horse's mouth.
didn't they implement a "worst 10% employees on arbitrary performance metrics get axed" annual policy that has crippled their ability to train up new talent over potentially the entire next decade by repeatedly kneecapping their own employee demographics, or am i thinking of GE?
>Ah, so basically the same short-sighted quarterly profit seeking that's wrecking every industry atm.
welcome to capitalism, where if the failure happens less often than quarterly, it's more profitable to ignore it.
there's a reason Milton Friedman's macroeconomic 'theories' struggled to account for the existence of time - it sort of undermines the whole "profit seeking is always a net good (don't look far enough ahead to see the consequences of wealth concentration)" and "better profit means you're running things better (don't look far enough back to see the impact of different market entry times on profit)" lines if you don't make time an externality you can just ignore outside of the narrow ideal you want to sell to policymakers
A bit late on the response I know, but yes, everybody does that, that I know of at least. GE definitely does and I think Boeing does to. It's the business and management side interfering with the engineering side. Most of the time if you're a good engineer and visible, you're fine but sometimes you could be a good engineer, just not that visible and get the axe. Aerospace business has its ups and downs like every business, it's pretty cyclical and you know when you're in axing season. It's especially bad in the engine business though, big ups and downs there. The kneecapping is especially retarded when you consider at most companies there's tens of hours worth of training going into each new engineer, I think GE does up to 70 hours or some shit, and the company is paying them all the while, then they cut that engineer loose when things get bad and that training money gets wasted.
>Most of the time if you're a good engineer and visible, you're fine but sometimes you could be a good engineer, just not that visible and get the axe.
the real killer here is the fact that the engineers making good maintenance/failure tolerance design decisions aren't very visible - management, seemingly regardless of field, pathologically overvalues novelty. it's a similar effect to the replication crises in many academic fields, as PhDs are only granted for novelty and that has bled into research grants and institutional funding decisions made by administrators in ways that have crippled the entire research apparatus' ability to perform the "maintenance" of revisiting and verifying (or discrediting) past results.
i'm sure there's also an element of good engineers shooting down retarded design ideas from management itself on maintenance or failure tolerance grounds and getting ignored or worse, targeted for retribution, by the sorts of managers who think "because i'm in charge of them, i can do their jobs better".
Boeing HQ is now in Virginia, just like Northrop and Lockheed. Moving HQ is not the problem as every company has moved HQ away from production. Also, MD management, which came out of St Louis where the F15 and F18 are made, is not the problem. The problem is Boeing Seattle got cocky about their abilities and outsourced a bunch of shit (since they are commercial aircraft they can do this unlike defense). The fix the 737 has now is an engineering solution that could’ve been implemented from the beginning if they would have had their top talent working on it from the start. Seattle is just pissy Boeing has become bigger than only Seattle and moved production throughout the US so they blame others.
i wouldnt really call it an "own goal". installing a device that can kill the entire plane and not telling the crew about it is borderline murder. thats why they cant be trusted with a DOD project.
boeing moved their management HQ from seattle to chicago with the explicit goal of seperating the engineering teams from the management teams. that way they could force unsafe practices onto the seattle teams with less pushback. boeing was building the 737 MAX, which was a evolution of the 737 in which they put better engines on the existing plane. The engine mounts had to be adjusted to clear the ground, which would then cause different flight characteristics and require training from the pilots. Training that boeing did not want to pay for. so they installed a software program that was supposed to make the 737 max handle just like the 737 instead. the software failed multiple times and caused multiple crashes. It literally caused healthy planes to dive straight into the fucking ground. like 500 people were killed. The software was built by $9 an hour indian engineers.
>It's only in the last few years
universities became 50/50 in like 1983 you cock sucking ignorant dumbfuck.
I was aware of the 737 MAX issues but wasn't aware it was explicitly caused by separation of staff to push bullshit.
Ah, so basically the same short-sighted quarterly profit seeking that's wrecking every industry atm.
The investor's job is to squeeze as much profit out of a company as possible and hold it only as an asset to squeeze its annual remaining pennies.
And this is why some company's do stock buybacks, so they aren't forced to be at the whims of the investors. Also so they don't have to give out dividends of course.
>Mutts awarding contracts for a 6th gen fighter next year
>has already prototyped and flown 6th gens
>Bugmen still can't reliably produce engines for the J-20
It's over wumaobros
shitposting aside I'm real curious on the weapons payloads the new 6th gens will have, there were some interesting concepts during the ATF program like staggered and even vertical missile magazines. There were some reliability issues with the magazines but it would be a great way to get bigger internal payloads, especially if the 6th gens end up pretty big (I think they will)
Dorito is going to be big
I hope LockMart wins. Boeing is Sig-tier. Northrop can only make edgy sci-fi bombers.
LockMart is the sig of fighter jet designers. The yf-22 was a piece of shit compared to the yf-23. Lockmart only got the contract because they appealed to traditionalist dogfighting mentalities.
the 23 was barely a flyable mockup. It wasn't as mature a design.
Skunkworks motto is get to a prototype fast. This helped LMT again for F35 because the design was so much more mature than Boeing's huehue plane.
NG should stick to bombers, but NGAD is kind of like a bomber, so that might improve their chances. However, LMT's practice with F35's systems gives them a huge edge on avionics.
>This helped LMT again for F35.
>Implying the f-35 had a good, efficient development cycle.
And the yf-23 ended up being the plane we want the NGAD to be. Fast, long ranged, and prioritising stealth over manoeuvrability.
>the 23 was barely a flyable mockup
was that why it not only out ranged the Yf-22, but was faster too?
The YF-23 submitted to the ATF program didn't have working weapon bays, while the YF-22 did have a working weapons bay and demonstrated shooting AIM-9 and AIM-120 out of them. It would take significantly less work and less risk to turn the Y-22 into the F-22 than YF-23 in to F-23. That's the main reason F-22 won, because it was the less risky option that was still good enough for the requirements.
>300m per plane
jesus titty fucking christ
Yea they let that one slip a year or so ago, saying the projected airframe costs are in the $250-400m range.
If that combat radius truly ends up being 1000nm that would be insane. A carrier capable version could hit targets on the west Taiwanese coast while the carrier group sits DEEP in the Philippine sea without refueling. Obviously infographics are wild but I really think the range is what they need and on a plane that big it might be possible to get close.
The Navy has it's own NGAD program for a more conventional carrier based 6th gen to replace Superhornets. The Air Force NGAD is explicitly for fighting china, the goal is to have these things take off from Hawaii or Port Darwin well outside the range of Chinese Ballistic missiles, tank at a safe distance, then dash in and assassinate every AWACS, tanker, and ELINT plane the Chinese have. Then F-22's and F-35's clean up the headless chicken fighters.
>Stealth ([...] Visual)
What the actual fuck did they mean by this
Partial metamaterial invisibility or chameleon style electronic inks?
This always peaks my interest when this pops up. Wonder if this in reference to front aspect visual rather than spooky ghost stealth shit, but at this point you never know.
Maybe belly/top lcd screens which project the below/above image to pretend it's see-through.
tbf the f22 has been around for 25 years to put that into perspective. That's a long time for a early gen5 test airframe. It didn't serve fully in it's original purpose but it gave us everything we needed for the f35 advancement program and now NGAD.
She's still sexy as hell but I wish we got the fy23.
We can finally put an end to insufferable Serb posting
Some anon in an aircraft thread a few weeks back posting a link to a pdf analysing the impact of stealth on air combat.
It started off with a historical perspective talking about the strategies used by WW1/2 fighter pilots to attack with stealth, then explained why kinematics became less important as technology improved and gun kills began to be replaced by short-range missile kills then BVR missile kills, and finally argued why a stealthy, large drone-controller was the optimum fighter aircraft for the future.
Anyone know what I'm talking about? Anyone got a link?
I'm not sure if what you're talking about meant it this way but there's a lot of people that claim stealth fighters don't need to maneuver as much since dogfighting is dead etc and while I do think building jets to dogfight is a little bit of a wasted/niche effort I plainly disagree maneuvering as a whole isn't needed as much as some places imply. Kinematics like pulling cobras and other air show shit is dumb but they still matter for lots of other things like setting up shots and evading ranged incoming. Eventually stealth tech is gonna proliferate, IRST tech is good but the range sits around 75-100km depending on what source you read. I imagine stealth fighters trying to get IR tracks on eachother will be difficult and combat shift to to very close range again (though still beyond visual). Shit like HOBS and being nimble to evade incoming IR will still be relevant. Obviously that scenario is insanely simplified but having the maneuverability to put yourself in a more survivable position when you detect something trying to kill you is something I wouldn't want to lack.
I would be surprised if it doesn't have an active protection system. A plane that large and expensive seems to require it.
HEAVY FIGHTERS ARE BACK BABY.
I NEVER LOST FAITH.
If you mean longer range fighters than yes. This has been a clear drawback of the cuurent stable of options that NATO has produced. As the range and proliference of standoff munitions has increased its become a larger and larger concern.
i also mean large airframes, twin engines, multiple crew, defensive armament, heavy offensive armament.
"Armament" is handled differently that it was in ww2, in part due to the prevalence of multirole airframes. Basically all major airframes are "heavy" nowadays in that regard.
i mean.... dont you think a plane operating a bunch of drones with their own missiles is heavier armament than the f-35s 4 missiles?
Yes, but I also consider a flight of F-35s to have more munitions than a single one. That's what happens when you have multiple airframes and add them up.
You realize that modern fighters are generally that size or larger, right?
anon you realize that "large" is a relative term right?
stop being an autist.
Then be clear on what you mean dipshit. I'm over here trying to drag out of you what you actually mean and all you are offering is "vibes." Speak!
The analysis did go a bit far down the 'stealth is king' route in my opinion but overall it was pretty solid. At the end of the day it's a balancing act and everything is a trade off - maneuverability isn't useless but when it comes at a cost to stealth or sensor quality or even price you need to make a call about how valuable it really is. Same goes for stealth - is a 0.5% reduction in RCS worth a 50% drop in speed? Probably not. Is a 50% drop in RCS worth a 0.5% drop in speed? Of course. It's when the differences aren't so stark that the decisions are harder to make. You don't want to get obsessed with maximum stealth no matter the costs elsewhere but at the same time you don't want to keep remaking marginal improvements on the same basic design framework if it blinds you to some revolutionary change.
As far as IRST specifically, aerodynamic heating provides a pretty solid argument against going supersonic unless you really have to. Detection distance is going to be much greater when it comes to something blazing through the sky vs traveling more sedately.
China announces the new 6.5 gen Dragontiger J28T56W Super Implessive flying dumpling wrapper
west bros, its over
Is it pronounced N-GAD, or N'GAD?
I just hope they'll permanently associate drones to single Gen6's so the pilots can start treating their drone swarms like pets.
ima name my drones
Come on, name them after the Apostles, like that Italian kid in Macross Frontier.
>just hope they'll permanently associate drones to single Gen6's so the pilots can start treating their drone swarms like pets.
When the parent dies, the only way to reuse the surviving drones is to hard reset them. But some memories will still remain in the ghost in the machine.
Man that's weird, it feels like the F-22 barely saw any service at all
>tfw all the flight sims you played as a kid had the F-22 as the future fighter that would soon become the new standard
It feels like it never even happened
I mean.... it stands to reason that flight sims would have the then most advanced plane as the 'plane of the future', it's just that planes of the future are expensive as fuck
I know. I just can't believe that it's been in service for almost 20 years. It doesn't feel like anywhere near that long. The future recedes
I mean they didn't fly their first combat sorties till 2014
That's a big part of it for sure. They had no real visibility until the ISIS conflict
Too much money and effort was spent blowing up tusken raiders in the desert over the last 20 years, so the F22 never got a fair shot at full scale production and developmental iteration. Its old enough now that they might as well start from scratch.
I mean the NGAD is an F-22 replacement. It's entire point is supposed to be air superiority
has there ever been a clearer message to find jesus
I regret not enlisting to become a fighter pilot because I saw it as immoral at the time
You probably wouldn't have passed the maths tests anyway. Shit's difficult because you have to do it in your head.
who needs math when the f35 does it all
The airforce has an excess of pilots compared to planes, so they use the tests to filter out the dipshits.
>yet another thread ruined by 4chan spam
can you gays keep this shit on the containment board where it belongs? does every single thread on this godforsaken website have to have 20 people yelling about minorities?
>preliminary studies for the successor to the NGAD are well underway.
Most nations are struggling to jump from 4th gen to 4.5 yet the US is already almost ready to select it's 6th gen and working on 7th gen. Can no one else come close?
To be fair preliminary studies likely means brain storming future concepts that COULD become development programs that COULD end up in the US's eventual 7th gen. We are 20+ years out from a serious conceptual design phase.
More like a half decade from concepts and a decade from starting development. 15-20 years is the time span for deployment. F22 started in 1985 and was publicly introduced in 2005.
I'm assuming the technical barrier between 6th and 7th gen will take longer to manifest, I could be proven wrong though.
How can there possibly be a role for 7th gen? Will they be QI engine spaceplanes?
>Some anon in an aircraft thread a few weeks back posting a link to a pdf analysing the impact of stealth on air combat.
>It started off with a historical perspective talking about the strategies used by WW1/2 fighter pilots to attack with stealth, then explained why kinematics became less important as technology improved and gun kills began to be replaced by short-range missile kills then BVR missile kills, and finally argued why a stealthy, large drone-controller was the optimum fighter aircraft for the future.
>Anyone know what I'm talking about? Anyone got a link?
Asking again, just in case.