Boeing to build NGAD Will build F-47

[brabus]

19 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

What is the problem with LM’s proposal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The two companies took different approaches to meeting the requirements. Boeing came up with a better concept - I don’t know a single fighter pilot from any service that doesn’t share that sentiment. Sorry, can only be vague on the internets. 
 

FWIW, it’s badass and a slam dunk…in theory. The pessimist (realist?) in me says they’ll fuck it up and it’ll be F-35 2.0 from a programatics perspective. At least there have been some solid fighter guys involved in the program up to this point, unlike the F-35 where the fighter SMEs of the early days were F-4 guys, who God bless ‘em, had zero fucking idea what a 5G fighter should be like (though they may have carried their balls in wheelbarrows, respect).

Edited Sunday at 09:24 AM by brabus

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, brabus said:

The two companies took different approaches to meeting the requirements. Boeing came up with a better concept - I don’t know a single fighter pilot from any service that doesn’t share that sentiment. Sorry, can only be vague on the internets. 
 

FWIW, it’s badass and a slam dunk…in theory. The pessimist (realist?) in me says they’ll fuck it up and it’ll be F-35 2.0 from a programatics perspective. At least there have been some solid fighter guys involved in the program up to this point, unlike the F-35 where the fighter SMEs of the early days were F-4 guys, who God bless ‘em, had zero fucking idea what a 5G fighter should be like (though they may have carried their balls in wheelbarrows, respect).

Gotcha 

That’s the rub…Boeing…

[Clark Griswold]

9 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Don’t give them ideas

I know but something will likely have to give

 

[Lawman]

I know but something will likely have to give
 

Bone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SurelySerious]

Bone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1) Offer up something for divestment that’s already slated for divestment

2) ??

3) profit

I’m for it.

[Lawman]

1) Offer up something for divestment that’s already slated for divestment

2) ??

3) profit

I’m for it.

Divest now, not over a decade.

And when somebody comes out screaming “but IndoPacom!” remind them that Bone is neither the sole means of providing nor the most survivable method of delivering strikes in that scenario.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SurelySerious]

Divest now, not over a decade.

And when somebody comes out screaming “but IndoPacom!” remind them that Bone is neither the sole means of providing nor the most survivable method of delivering strikes in that scenario.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If 90% of the fleet never gets off the ground from CONUS, China can’t shoot them down. It’s a feature.

[Clark Griswold]

Bone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup
I hate it but if Uncle Sugar is not feeling spendy then I see this as bill payers:
Bone, Hog, oldest Vipers, remaining 15Cs, some spec ops 130s, some -38s
Not saying I want all these divestment but with Sentinel, Raider and now the 47 there is a need for a lotta money reprogramming
This executive administration is a spender if approached correctly methinks, Congress is TBD with what they did with the CR, held the line with no increase for inflation
Pushing for a big swap/new iron in the AD and ARC is something they (executive and some congressional members) might go for though
A new Air Force almost thru lots of new aircraft, weapons, systems, personnel reforms and structure. Smaller AD but the best toys, bigger ARC with newer iron/missions/responsibilities


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Yup
I hate it but if Uncle Sugar is not feeling spendy then I see this as bill payers:
Bone, Hog, oldest Vipers, remaining 15Cs, some spec ops 130s, some -38s
Not saying I want all these divestment but with Sentinel, Raider and now the 47 there is a need for a lotta money reprogramming
This executive administration is a spender if approached correctly methinks, Congress is TBD with what they did with the CR, held the line with no increase for inflation
Pushing for a big swap/new iron in the AD and ARC is something they (executive and some congressional members) might go for though
A new Air Force almost thru lots of new aircraft, weapons, systems, personnel reforms and structure. Smaller AD but the best toys, bigger ARC with newer iron/missions/responsibilities


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These ever shrinking fleets of non special capability sets have got to be killing us to maintain the infrastructure necessary to keep limping them along.

The Navy has almost twice as many AB destroyers as the Air Force has B1s…. For an airplane with no nuclear mission. And no amount of “but just think of what we could maybe do with hypersonic!” is going to suddenly make it worth keeping.

I’m almost convinced the Air Force has kept a couple of these sacrificial budget lambs (Hawg) around as long as they have because when they threaten to just cut it for something else Congress always orders them to keep it and somehow squeezes more money out of the couch cushions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

48 minutes ago, Lawman said:

These ever shrinking fleets of non special capability sets have got to be killing us to maintain the infrastructure necessary to keep limping them along.

The Navy has almost twice as many AB destroyers as the Air Force has B1s…. For an airplane with no nuclear mission. And no amount of “but just think of what we could maybe do with hypersonic!” is going to suddenly make it worth keeping.

I’m almost convinced the Air Force has kept a couple of these sacrificial budget lambs (Hawg) around as long as they have because when they threaten to just cut it for something else Congress always orders them to keep it and somehow squeezes more money out of the couch cushions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You might be right but that time to end that is now.

In everything big gov there is an element of jobs program / parochial pork, so long as that percentage is fairly low vs utility / value we can let that be as it’s the grease to make consensus happen.  We have to shift the mind of the politicians to not allow obsolete systems to be continued but make them shift to a model where the amount of relevant systems is the trade space, at that point we may have a bit too much of this / that but at least it’s modern, reliable, relevant.

[MT near]

How can anyone have any faith in the system after the last decade + of gross mismanagement. 

My projection...tons of money spent, not many aircraft, and a less lethal AF. 

It's already here in a lot of ways. 

[brabus]

10 hours ago, MT near said:

after the last decade +

4+ decades to be more precise. The whole system needs to be destroyed and rebuilt. 

[Vito]

Some of you younger folks may not remember that the F-18, and the C-17 were criticized as boondoggles and worthless jobs programs. Every weapons system has some teething problems, let’s Hope Boeing minimizes them this time around. 

[SocialD]

On 3/23/2025 at 5:18 AM, brabus said:

The two companies took different approaches to meeting the requirements. Boeing came up with a better concept - I don’t know a single fighter pilot from any service that doesn’t share that sentiment. Sorry, can only be vague on the internets. 
 

FWIW, it’s badass and a slam dunk…in theory. The pessimist (realist?) in me says they’ll fuck it up and it’ll be F-35 2.0 from a programatics perspective. At least there have been some solid fighter guys involved in the program up to this point, unlike the F-35 where the fighter SMEs of the early days were F-4 guys, who God bless ‘em, had zero fucking idea what a 5G fighter should be like (though they may have carried their balls in wheelbarrows, respect).

 

 

The F-4 could just barely eek out 5 G's, so that story checks out.  

[Majestik Møøse]

On 3/23/2025 at 2:18 AM, brabus said:

unlike the F-35 where the fighter SMEs of the early days were F-4 guys, who God bless ‘em, had zero fucking idea what a 5G fighter should be like (though they may have carried their balls in wheelbarrows, respect).

This stuff gets to me. The absolute tragedy of being the last badass in the previous technology. The last spearman. The last archer. The last horseman. The last swordsman. It’ll be a while until the last pilot, unless the FPV kids get us at step.

[brabus]

The problem lies with LM (and perhaps DOD for not demanding more ownership in the early days) - it should have been Viper/Eagle/Hornet pilots wearing patches who were still active providing SME guidance. 6th gen SMEs are at least relatively recently active/active 4G and 5G patches - it’s a step in the right direction. Unfortunately the F-35 was like asking me for my opinions on 7th gen 20 years from now. We all expire - accept it and enjoy the next phase of life!

Edited Tuesday at 01:27 PM by brabus

[Hacker]

A former squadronmate who is on the USAF GS side of things said, "everything was going great until the corporate partners were introduced to the program."

[ClearedHot]

40 minutes ago, Hacker said:

A former squadronmate who is on the USAF GS side of things said, "everything was going great until the corporate partners were introduced to the program."

The GS' always say that and they are usually the source of all evil and stone age thinking.

[SocialD]

^^^^ the corporate partner.   

 

I kid, I kid CH. 

[Blue]

4 hours ago, Hacker said:

A former squadronmate who is on the USAF GS side of things said, "everything was going great until the corporate partners were introduced to the program."

I don't get it.  What does that even mean?  Things were going great until Boeing and LM started on the program?

Who else did this person think was going to build these planes?

Edited Tuesday at 10:45 PM by Blue

[Hacker]

1 hour ago, Blue said:

I don't get it.  What does that even mean?  Things were going great until Boeing and LM started on the program?

Who else did this person think was going to build these planes?

It means that, unlike with ATF and JSF and every previous fighter acquisition program of the last 50 years, the AF claims to have internally designed much of the basic capabilities, and then only brought in Boeing and LM (and Northrop?) after -- reportedly years after --- to fully flesh out what they've done internally into an actual production aircraft.

 

So, the opposite of putting out an RFP and having manufacturers design their own attempts to meet the requirements in the RFP.

To wit:

https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/

Edited Tuesday at 11:35 PM by Hacker

[Sua Sponte]

9 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

The GS' always say that and they are usually the source of all evil and stone age thinking.

As a former contractor who worked on contract proposals on the KC-46 and now GS, this is 100% accurate. It also doesn't help going through 6-9 SPOs per year due to GS's bouncing around to other jobs to get promoted.

[HuggyU2]

Wait... is this an elusive "Hacker spotting"?!?!

Kind of like seeing Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster!

Or did Chang hack Hacker's account??

[Hacker]

On 3/25/2025 at 9:52 PM, HuggyU2 said:

Wait... is this an elusive "Hacker spotting"?!?!

Kind of like seeing Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster!

Or did Chang hack Hacker's account??

I can normally be found hunting ancient artifacts like Indiana Jones....or maybe hanging out with Lara Croft?

I do use WeChat during my Shanghai and Guangzhou layovers, so maybe that makes me a CCP associate.

Edited 20 hours ago by Hacker