MQ-25 Stingray's Extreme Range Gives It Massive Potential Far Beyond A Tanker
Boeing's MQ-25 Stingray is behind schedule and over budget, but it is still set to up the carrier air wing's (CVW) aerial refueling game dramatically. According to the Navy, the service is basically getting a flying unmanned gas can that is optimized for cruising efficiently at subsonic jet speeds and loitering for extended periods. While there have been fragmented hints that it could execute other roles in the future, and it is already built with a secondary reconnaissance function via its under-nose sensor ball, its potential far beyond a tanker seems significantly underplayed. This appears to be by design, at least at this time. Simply put, the range and endurance, specifically, that the MQ-25 will give the carrier air wing is totally unprecedented and it could have huge impacts well outside of the scope of transferring gas.
This little-discussed, but glaring added value should help with justifying the Stingray's huge cost. Currently, the MQ-25 is coming in at a price of around $130 million per copy with 76 on order. To its credit, the Navy also highlights that MQ-25 is a 'pathfinder' platform that will establish the critical procedures, supporting technologies and tactics, as well as onboard infrastructure, for operating all types of future higher-end drones from a carrier. Navy leadership has promised the production-representative MQ-25 will finally fly this year and be operating from a carrier in 2026 in a testing capacity.
Exploiting the MQ-25's latent potential could also go a long way to help quell dissatisfaction after the Navy stepped away from its highly-promising multi-role unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) program, the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft, to procure what seemed like 'just a tanker' instead back in the mid 2010s.
The Navy has confirmed to us that the MQ-25's core design requirement of being able to fly 500 miles from the carrier, offload 15,000 pounds of gas, and then come back to the boat is still in place. This will offer a lot of flexibility over the F/A-18E/F Super Hornets that reluctantly serve in the carrier-based tanker role today.
The F/A-18E/F has a combat radius of around the same distance — 500 miles — that the MQ-25 is designed to go before dispensing more than a Super Hornet's entire internal fuel load to the thirsty fighters. As such, Stingrays will extend the organic reach of the air wing's tactical jets by an estimated 300 to 400 miles at a time when it needs it more than ever. The vastness of the Pacific theater has left the current range of the Navy's CVWs sorely lacking. The MQ-25 will also keep fighter aircraft patrolling on station far from the ship for longer and while carrying heavier weapons loads. This is an especially important aspect when executing fleet defense duties.
The MQ-25's more mundane work orbiting over the carrier as a recovery tanker, which the Super Hornet fulfills today, will be their daily 'bread and butter' and will free up strike fighters to perform their primary mission sets and save precious airframe life on these high-performance aircraft. Roughly one-third of the Super Hornet's current utilization aboard the carrier is in the tanking role. So, the four squadrons of strike fighters aboard a supercarrier will have their core mission capacity expanded without adding more of the jets.
The MQ-25s were intended to be able to remain aloft for at least three launch-recovery cycles, dropping down to provide fuel and then loitering up high between cycles. As such, they will also be far more flexible in this role as they have a lot of gas to give for a far longer period of time. They also won't have to regularly recover with the rest of the aircraft on every cycle like the Super Hornets generally do.
All the attributes of the MQ-25s, along with their two stores pylons, offer huge additional opportunities. The fact that this aircraft can hold so much gas and runs on the efficient and proven Rolls-Royce AE 3007 turbofan, a variant of which also powers the RQ-4 Global Hawk, means it can stay aloft a long, long time when operating outside of the tanker mission set. This could include slowly loitering for maximum endurance while at a particular station far from the ship or over it. It can also include traversing huge distances at jet speeds and altitudes.
While arming the MQ-25 with standoff cruise missiles has already been hinted at, and doing the same for additional sensor and networking systems in underwing pods is a future possibility, the big question is just how far and how long can an MQ-25 fly while not required to give away its own gas on a tanker mission?
This is very important as the MQ-25 could be used to carry out missions very far from the carrier — thousands of miles away. On the other hand, it could also be used to loiter high above the carrier strike group for long periods, working as a critical sensor and networking platform. This endurance drastically exceeds that of the aerial refueling-capable E-2D Hawkeye and its crew, which fly now for up to seven hours on a sortie.
The MQ-25, fitted with the right sensor and networking package, could potentially take on some of the Hawkeye's role and do it more efficiently and persistently. 'Look-down' radar data collected would be fed to air defense crews on Navy ships below for exploitation. It could also provide an elevated data-sharing gateway to keep the carrier strike group and other assets connected over extended distances without the use of beyond-line-of-sight satellite communications. While the MQ-25 wouldn't really be a replacement for the E-2, it could pick up the slack when its manned counterpart is not available and/or augment the E-2's sensor and networking reach during certain periods.
We have reached out to Boeing, Rolls Royce, and the U.S. Navy in regards to the MQ-25's actual range, endurance, and fuel load. None were willing or authorized to provide us with that information. This may seem odd as it is just a basic specification, but, as noted earlier, it appears the powers that be are laser-focused on keeping the MQ-25 branded as an essential tanker, one that does not threaten any other mission sets that manned Navy aircraft communities want to retain. But the potential is glaringly there, and so is the demand. The Navy wants its carrier air wings made up of more drones than manned aircraft in the coming decade.
Regardless, we can do some simple and very rough estimates on what the MQ-25 could provide in terms of range.
Based on the 15,000 pounds of gas offload figure at 500 miles, it seems that the MQ-25 would have at least a similar internal fuel load as the RQ-4 Global Hawk, or around 17,300 pounds, and probably a bit more. Let's call it 18,500 pounds. The RQ-4, which is optimized for efficient high-altitude flight, can stay aloft for nearly a day and a half. The MQ-25 is not as well optimized for endurance and high-altitude operations, but its slender straight wing and streamlined fuselage certainly should be no slouch in this department.
If we use a 1,200 pounds-per-hour fuel burn in cruise for the MQ-25, which is in line with commercial variants of the Rolls-Royce AE 3007 found on multiple aircraft, like the Citation X and Embraer-145, that equates to an endurance of nearly 16 hours while in cruise. Flying at 375 miles-per-hour, that turns into an unrefueled range of nearly 6,000-miles. Factoring in reserves and terminal operations, we can call it 5,500 miles. If it is sent to loiter on station at altitude, where lower power settings would be used, its endurance would be significantly longer.
Once again, these are all rough, speculative numbers, but what should be clear is that the MQ-25 is an adaptable medium-altitude, long-endurance (MALE) jet-powered drone and this can be exploited dramatically by the Navy.
There are also lingering questions of where the MQ-25's low observable (stealthy) features come from, as these elements were not in any way a requirement of the aforementioned Carrier-Based Aerial Refueling Systems (CBARS) program that gave birth to the MQ-25 Stingray. They were part of the aborted Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program that came before it. Boeing's MQ-25 did at least find very heavy influence from work done on that program, it would seem. Whether or not the company's T-1 MQ-25 demonstrator was reworked from a UCLASS configuration for CBARS remains unclear.
We recently inquired with Boeing about the connective tissue between the MQ-25 and UCLASS or a similar carrier-borne UCAV concept. They said the following:
'The MQ-25 Stingray was influenced by the Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program. During the MQ-25's development, we built upon the design elements and lessons learned from the UCLASS program to fit U.S. Navy's requirement for a carrier-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) that can provide aerial refueling and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.'
At least in broad strokes, the unrealized Multi-Role Endurance (MRE) initiative of the late 1990s seems to have some requirements commonality, as well. Minus the MQ-25's exotic blended inlet design, the concept art below from Lockheed Martin looks remarkably similar to the MQ-25 we know today. It is unknown if there is any relation, and it's unlikely that is the case. Lockheed Martin ended up pitching a flying wing design for CBARS.
Regardless, these low-observable features, although not really capitalized on now for the tanker-optimized configuration, could come in very handy for future roles, particularly when operating against foes with increasingly advanced anti-access capabilities and especially extremely long-range air defenses.
So, what does this all mean? It means the Navy can integrate the MQ-25 into its CVWs and, in doing so, blaze a trail for all unmanned operations from carriers in the future. In the process, it will also gain a platform that can be readily adopted for many other highly critical missions. This includes ones at can range across vast distances without putting a pilot at risk.
While an advanced Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) may have a combat radius of 1,000 to 1,500 miles, the MQ-25 could act as the long arm of the air wing. Not just in terms of drone capabilities, but in general. Just using bolt-on stores, it could be used to surveil vast areas. It could deliver standoff weapons — such as cruise missiles and air-launched drones — thousands of miles from the carrier strike group. Paired with JASSM/LRASM, the MQ-25 could fly continental distances before releasing their standoff weapons, which would only add to the total strike range. They could also deploy swarms of smaller drones that could wreak havoc on naval groups from outside their air defense engagement ranges. They could act as remote sensor and relay platforms for airborne early warning and networking duties, or provide persistent electronic surveillance and warfare support, as well. The networking part could play a particularly key role for future CCA operations. The MQ-25 could also potentially act as a direct striker to provide surveillance and close air support in uncontested airspace. There is also the possibility that it could work in an anti-submarine/anti-surface warfare/sea control role.
The latter concept of distributing aerial anti-submarine warfare duties across a broader set of carrier-based aircraft and centralizing the processing and decision-making part of the mission dates back deep into the Cold War, which you can read about here. Now, with sonobuoy pods available for MALE drones and work already being done on creating the networking scheme to enable these kinds of activities, MQ-25 could play a central anti-submarine role in the future. Providing such a capability would help fill the vast hole left by the retirement of the S-3 Viking in an age of growing submarine threats. Today, nearly all organic aerial anti-submarine warfare duties the carrier strike group executes are done by MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopters.
Finally, the Stingray even could work in a cargo-carrying capacity, to deliver small time-sensitive parts and other cargoes to the carrier from destinations thousands of miles away in a pinch — much farther than what the troubled CMV-22 Osprey could accomplish. CCAs are also being eyed for this role, but they wouldn't have the range or payload capacity that an MQ-25 could offer. This could prove essential during a conflict in the Pacific, where keeping the air wing and ships in the strike group running under extreme circumstances will become more challenging over time.
Beyond bolt-on stores for adding capabilities, the MQ-25 airframe is clearly adaptable. It has a large internal volume for fuel. Sacrificing some of that gas could allow sensors to be embedded within its form factor. Conformal radar arrays could give the aircraft even more powerful sensor capabilities than what podded systems can provide and without the drag penalty from an external system. These arrays could provide traditional radar functions, as well as electronic attack and long-range communications.
A weapons bay could also be very useful, if a variant of the MQ-25 were built to take on more significant kinetic roles. It isn't clear if the aircraft has a weapons bay now — possibly a latent capability that was ported over from UCLASS — or at least if its design could have one easily added. It clearly has the volume for one.
In the end, the MQ-25's range, which comes as a byproduct of its refueling mission genesis, could and should make it extremely valuable in a Pacific fight. It gives the carrier its own platform that can really reach out very far to do a whole slew of things. This potential, as well as the aforementioned work it will do to blaze an unmanned carrier operations trail for other drones to follow it, could make it the most important naval aircraft of an era — one far more important than a tanker alone.
Contact the author: Tyler@TWZ.com

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Air India Run 787 Dreamliner Crashes, Boeing's Shares Drop 4.8%
Air India-operated Boeing's BA 787-8 passenger jet, carrying 242 people bound for London, crashed yesterday in Ahmedabad, India. This accident raised concerns about safety in air travel, and as a consequence, shares of Boeing fell 4.8% yesterday. Pre-market trading is showing a further decline of 1.1%. All passengers, except one, and all crew members lost their lives. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research This fatal accident is raising questions about the safety of Boeing's commercial airplane model. Although the 787-8 Dreamliner is involved in such a devastating accident for the first time, Boeing's 737 Max model was involved in two major crashes and was grounded for almost a year. It was allowed to resume operation after adding safety measures. The real reason behind the fatal crash of Air India flight (AI 171) is still being investigated by government agencies. Analyzing the videos, a few aviation experts suggested that the lack of engine thrust after takeoff was the primary reason behind the accident. Experts are considering the failure of the dual engines of Boeing's 787-8 Dreamliner as the cause of the crash. Some experts also suggested that a bird hit or a lack of fuel supply might have stopped the engines from functioning properly, which is the lifeline of the aircraft. One of the two black boxes of AI 171 has been recovered from the wreckage, and the search continues for the other. While engine failure, human error or lack of proper maintenance are the probabilities linked to the accident, the exact cause will come to light only after a thorough analysis. Boeing's management has offered its deepest condolences to the loved ones of the passengers and crew on board Air India Flight 171, as well as everyone affected in Ahmedabad. The company also informed that it will offer full support to the investigation led by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau. The company still has a long backlog for its commercial aircraft model. The total backlog of Boeing's different models of commercial aircraft is 5,943, which indicates wide acceptance of its aircraft among the airliners. Many airliners might reconsider their existing orders with Boeing after the fatal crash of AI 171, which can benefit its rival Airbus Group EADSY. Airbus' current backlog of commercial aircraft stands at 8,630. Thousands of flights took off and landed safely globally on the same day. Such incidents affect the confidence of the flier, yet that does not stop airliners from carrying out their year, Boeing projected a 3% increase in airplane deliveries over the next 20 years, with airliners requiring nearly 44,000 new commercial airplanes by 2043. Per this projection, there is ample scope for aircraft producers and suppliers to provide the necessary parts to build airplanes. Boeing uses General Electric's GE unit GE Aerospace and Rolls Royce engines for its aircraft. The engine supplier will benefit from the increasing demand for new airplanes. Boeing currently has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The Boeing Company (BA) : Free Stock Analysis Report GE Aerospace (GE) : Free Stock Analysis Report Airbus Group (EADSY) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Sign in to access your portfolio


Los Angeles Times
30 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Boeing returns to crisis-mode as India crash poses new test
Boeing Co. Chief Executive Officer Kelly Ortberg finds himself in a painfully familiar role as he faces another crisis, this time over a crash involving the company's marquee 787 Dreamliner jet in India that killed more than 240 people. In his first nine months at Boeing, Ortberg has led the company through the early signs of a turnaround. He's also navigated a cash crunch, debilitating labor unrest, a rush to overhaul the company's safety operations, and a trade war wrought by President Trump against one of Boeing's biggest customers: China. But just as Ortberg looked poised to be gaining momentum and earning cautious praise for the discipline and rigor he brought to the long-troubled company, a horrifying crash of an Air India 787 bound for London served as a reminder of how swiftly confidence in the planemaker can erode. Boeing stock dropped nearly 5% Wednesday on the news of the accident, which killed 241 of the 242 people on board, once again associating the planemaker with safety concerns. Airlines around the globe meanwhile waited to to see if regulators would demand new inspections of 787 Dreamliner fleet, or even a grounding, though the cause of the crash remains unknown for now. 'It's a classic moment of crisis management and fast response: getting out there and sending teams to understand what happened, and just being there to reassure people,' said aerospace consultant Richard Aboulafia. 'A lot of life is just showing up.' Ortberg and Boeing commercial aircraft head Stephanie Pope spent the initial hours after the tragedy reaching out to Air India executives, 'to offer our full support,' the CEO told employees in a memo viewed by Bloomberg. The Boeing executives also scrapped plans to travel to the Paris Air Show next week, where they'd been expected to showcase Boeing's progress and unveil orders. GE Aerospace, which made the engines on the doomed Dreamliner, canceled a June 17 investor day in Paris. 'Safety is foundational to our industry and is at the core of everything that we do,' Ortberg told employees. 'Please keep the families and loved ones affected by this accident in your thoughts.' It will take investigators weeks, if not months, to sort through the evidence and pinpoint what caused the first fatal crash for Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. That's likely to keep the spotlight on Ortberg and Boeing's safety record, rather than the progress in the factories toward returning to pre-pandemic manufacturing rates. The Air India Dreamliner rolled down almost the entire length of an 11,000-foot runway before lumbering in the air, according to data from FlightRadar24. It only gained about 625 feet of altitude before sinking to the ground with its nose up, suggesting an aerodynamic stall, said aviation consultant Robert Mann. There were several puzzling aspects, including the configuration of the plane's flight surfaces and landing gear — which wasn't retracted. 'It was clearly a case where it was not accelerating and should have been obvious early enough you just reject the takeoff,' Mann said. Investigators will examine what might have caused the loss of power — whether from a bird strike, contaminated fuel, maintenance or pilot error, or some other factor. They say it's less likely the crash was related to the design and build of the 787 itself, which had been flying for Air India for more than 11 years. Even still, for Boeing executives 'it's going to be a very tense 24 hours,' Aboulafia said. Ortberg, a low-key Midwesterner and engineer by training, came out of retirement last year to take on one of the tougher turnarounds in corporate America. Boeing was reeling from a near-catastrophe on an airborne 737 Max that spurred investigations, a crackdown by US regulators and a leadership exodus. He's kept a low public profile while preaching internally the importance of instilling a culture that emphasizes civility, respect and pride in workmanship. A working group of employees, formed to craft a statement of values, insisted on urging Boeing's workforce to 'give a damn.' Boeing customers like John Plueger, the chief executive officer of Air Lease, the largest US aircraft financier, have noticed a difference. The manufacturer's planes are arriving on time, after years of chronic delays, Plueger said in an interview last month. The company's jet factories and supply chain seem to have fewer disruptions and quality breakdowns, although they're still a concern, he said. The US planemaker even enjoyed the momentum of a record order placed by Qatar Airways during a visit by Trump, which propelled its May orders to the highest such tally in about 18 months. That momentum risks stalling as the company works to find out what role, if any, Boeing played in the crash. The plane at the center of the tragedy was built during the early days of the 787 program, when Boeing was struggling with the consequences of a decision to offload much of the design and development work to suppliers in order to cut costs. The Dreamliner was the 26th to roll off Boeing's line, placing it among the 60 early aircraft that required extensive rework after they'd rolled out of Boeing's factory north of Seattle. Follow Bloomberg India on WhatsApp for exclusive content and analysis on what billionaires, businesses and markets are doing. Sign up here. The early turbulence of the 787 Dreamliner had faded as the carbon-composite jet settled into a mostly steady performer for carriers from ANA Holdings Inc. to United Airlines Holdings Inc. While Plueger has confidence in the company's leadership, 'Boeing is not completely out of the woods,' he said. 'It needs to consistently deliver and consistently demonstrate high quality production with no real glitches or problems or safety concerns.' Johnsson writes for Bloomberg.


Entrepreneur
32 minutes ago
- Entrepreneur
Boeing 787: With a History Of Faulty Concerns, Is It Safe?
The Boeing 787-8 models faced repeated scrutiny over safety and production practices. From John Barnett to Salehpour, Boeing whistleblowers had already warned of 787 Dreamliner concerns Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. The Air India Ahmedabad-London flight which crashed on Thursday afternoon, marked the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner's first fatal crash since the aircraft's introduction in 2011. As per the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), the plane issued a MAYDAY call immediately after takeoff but no further responses were recorded. Reportedly, 265 people have died. Prior to the crash, there were more than 1,100 variants of 787s in service since its inception. The company's website described it as 'best-selling passenger wide-body of all time', the aircraft have carried more than one billion passengers. However, the Dreamliner's troubles are a series of compounding issues plaguing the aircraft with development delays and cost overruns to faulty parts and whistleblower allegations. The Boeing 787-8 models faced repeated scrutiny over safety and production practices. From John Barnett to Salehpour, Boeing whistleblowers had already warned of 787 Dreamliner flaws. Technical issues have led to cancellations and maintenance delays across operators using the model. In 2024, whistleblower, Sam Salehpour, a Boeing engineer with 17 years of experience, reported that the 787's fuselage was fastened improperly. He described workers misaligning sections together which could create gaps and fatigue cracks mid air. John Barnett, a former Boeing quality manager, had also raised similar concerns stating that under pressure to meet deadlines, workers were installing substandard parts. These claims were rejected by Boeing. In early 2025, the Dreamliner's woes increased when Italian authorities uncovered a fraud scheme involving over 4,800 defective parts installed in Boeing 787s in service. From structural fittings to hydraulic systems, these parts were deemed non-compliant with aerospace standards, raising alarm about the safety of aircraft already in service. Boeing's safety issues are not only with Dreamliner, two major crashes involving Boeing planes new 737 Max model were reported in Indonesia and Ethiopia in 2018 and 2019. That model was taken out of service for almost a year, before being relaunched. The last Air India crash, in August 2020, involved a smaller Boeing 737-800 Air India Express which was landing at Calicut airport in bad weather and skidded off the runway. The London-bound flight's accident is under investigation and analysis of the black box data recorders, including the cockpit voice recorder, are awaited. "It's true that Boeing have had a bad time in the last few years, however the 787 has 1175 aircraft flying world wide, having done 5 million flights with 30 million flying hours over 15 years. This is the first major incident / accident of any kind of the 787, so it's a very safe aircraft as far as I'm concerned," said Sanjay Lazar, an aviation expert. In a statement, DGCA said the flight was operated by Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, an LTC with 8,200 flying hours, and a co-pilot with 1,100 hours of experience. "Both pilots were highly qualified and had close to 10,000 hours of flying. It appears to have been something extraordinary that happened as visuals suggest that the aircraft could not climb, and had no thrust, so either it was a catastrophic failure of both engines or some major ingestion into the engines. There will be an analysis of the black boxes and a thorough investigation by the AAIB & the NTSB and we will learn what happened," Lazar explained. In an official statement, Boeing president and CEO Kelly Ortberg said, "Our deepest condolences go out to the loved ones of the passengers and crew on board Air India Flight 171, as well as everyone affected in Ahmedabad. I have spoken with Air India Chairman N. Chandrasekaran to offer our full support, and a Boeing team stands ready to support the investigation led by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau."