Latest news with #AirPowerPodcast
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
F-47 Fighter Program Could See Multiple Versions Built In Increments
Boeing's F-47 sixth-generation stealth fighter may just be 'Increment 1' of the Air Force's Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) manned combat jet initiative. This is according to the former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics, Andrew Hunter, who had a major hand in the program up until the end of the Biden administration. Alongside the former Secretary of the Air Force, Frank Kendall, Hunter spoke on the latest edition of the Defense & Aerospace Report's Air Power Podcast. You can also read our previous run-down of the main revelations that came to pass in what was a wide-ranging discussion on the F-47 and the related NGAD initiative, here. Stressing that the competition for the NGAD manned combat jet, won by Boeing, was 'structured in a way to encourage […] creativity,' Hunter remarked that the F-47, now under contract for development, represents 'Increment 1,' noting that the program is based around the concept of there being future increments beyond this. As a result, the competition for the NGAD combat jet wasn't designed to be 'all or nothing,' rather, the winner will likely receive an eventual production contract for 'roughly' 100 aircraft, after which 'there will be other orders coming down the pike.' In the past, Kendall had repeatedly stated that the crewed component of NGAD will be made up of around 200 aircraft. Intriguingly, a very similar concept is already taking shape for the Air Force's CCA program. Anduril and General Atomics are currently developing designs as part of Increment 1, with these now designated as the YFQ-42A and YFQ-44A, respectively. Service officials have said they could ultimately buy between 100 and 150 Increment 1 CCAs, and multiple thousands of drones across all of the program's eventual increments. Increment II is already on the horizon, for instance. Hunter's words seem to suggest that all might not be lost for Lockheed Martin, which was beaten to the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) contract by Boeing's F-47 design. Perhaps there could even be a way back into the program in a leading position for Northrop Grumman, which announced what it described as a voluntary withdrawal from the NGAD combat jet competition in 2023. On the other hand, Hunter also indicated that Northrop Grumman was in line to be ejected from competition before that point, which might well adversely impact its future prospects here. Of course, whether either of these companies could take on a central role in the manned NGAD initiative via future increments involving different designs is questionable, with further developments of the F-47 looking to be a more realistic path to achieving the kinds of goals that Hunter refers to. It's also worth noting that these companies can still become (and likely will, at least to some degree) subcontractors to the prime contractor on the program. Clearly, however, Hunter sees different increments as being a part of the program for the NGAD combat jet, although 'time will tell how many increments ever get built.' As for how those future increments may look, Hunter didn't reveal any more details. Although he noted that 'both designs were quite creative,' it seems that Boeing's one for the F-47 may have been somewhat bolder and more innovative than that from rival Lockheed Martin. Hunter said that, in general, incumbent contractors (in this case, Lockheed Martin, already building the F-35) can often appear more risk-averse than challengers. The 'incentives may have been stronger for Boeing. In some ways, they needed to win this one more than Lockheed did,' Hunter added. Between them, Hunter and Kendall did give a few impressions of what the F-47 will likely consist of, which could help provide an idea of how it might be adapted for further increments in the future. Overall, it seems the F-47 follows the basic philosophy of the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter. As Kendall explained it, the F-47 will primarily be an 'F-22-like long-range air superiority focused aircraft, designed for power projection, and designed to go against the most stressing threats that we have.' On top of this, the F-47 will, from the outset, be equipped for the 'quarterback role,' in which it will control uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCAs). Further iterations of the NGAD combat jet could still have these qualities, but they might yet add more. Alternatively, the future iterations might emerge as less complex, cheaper designs, intended to maximize 'combat mass,' rather than offer the very highest level of penetrating air superiority capabilities. The ramifications of a lower-cost NGAD combat jet are something that we explored in depth when this same topic was brought up by Kendall last summer. Interestingly, this latter option would also seem to chime with the idea of an export-configured F-47, something that President Donald Trump referred to when he announced Boeing's win. Trump said that U.S. allies 'are calling constantly' with a view to obtaining an export version of the NGAD fighter. He said that the United States would be selling them to 'certain allies … perhaps toned-down versions. We'd like to tone them down about 10 percent, which probably makes sense, because someday, maybe they're not our allies, right?' As we pointed out at the time, getting the F-47 cleared for export, even in a downgraded version, could be a challenge, even more so than it was for the F-22. Kendall was generally circumspect about the chances of an F-47 export version. 'I would be very surprised if any of our partners were prepared to pay that unit cost for a new aircraft,' he said, in reference to the price tag of the basic F-47. Kendall says the F-47's unit cost is expected to be at least twice that of an F-35, or in the $160 million to $180 million range, based on publicly available information. In the past he has mentioned this new aircraft costing up to around three times that of existing designs, or upwards of $300 million. It's not clear what changed that would result in lowering his original estimate. 'Another factor right now, of course, is that the attitude we've taken towards our allies is driving a lot of them to rethink their degree of cooperation and commitment and reliance on us sources for equipment,' Kendall added. He was referring to the growing schisms between the United States and certain NATO allies, increasingly worried about Washington's commitment to mutual defense and its overall reliability as a strategic partner. Kendall also raised a question about the viability of a 'toned-down version' of the F-47, based on the requirements of prospective customers: 'I think, going forward, there are a number of things that will make it problematic for international sales of the F-47. One of them is going to be the statement that was made about lowering capability. You know, we basically have very close allies traditionally, and we share some of the best of our capabilities with them, because we have a lot of trust in them. This administration doesn't seem to be taking that point of view.' On the other hand, U.S. allies might be more willing to buy a somewhat downgraded NGAD crewed fighter if it were to be notably cheaper. Different future iterations of the NGAD combat jet could offer one way of achieving that. For now, we don't know what 'Increment 2' and beyond might look like, or even if the Air Force will find space and funds for them. However, it's worth noting that this is not the first time that fielding multiple variations of the NGAD fighter has been proposed. Back in 2021, TWZ reported on how the Air Force was apparently looking at fielding long- and shorter-range versions of the NGAD combat jet, optimized for operations in the Indo-Pacific and European theaters, respectively. At a House Armed Services Committee hearing regarding the Air Force's Fiscal Year 2022 budget request, Gen. James M. Holmes, the former head of Air Combat Command, brought up the idea of two distinct versions of the NGAD fighter component, an 'Indo-Pacific version' optimized for long-range/heavy-payload missions and one with shorter range sufficient for the European theater of operations. At the very least, it would appear that a different wing planform would be required for each jet to meet these goals. These different configurations could make the 'European version' a bit cheaper to buy, although savings might be offset by the need for different support infrastructure, with a knock-on effect on concepts of deployment and operation. It was later said that this concept had been dropped from where the Air Force was headed with the NGAD fighter program. But nevertheless, an iterative approach to the NGAD fighter jet could revive such an idea and make it a reality. At the same time, there would still be some significant commonality between different NGAD fighter increments regardless of the base airframe configuration. Having the aircraft's subsystems and software identical across different increments would help reduce risk, increase commonality, and drive down costs. Furthermore, the broader NGAD family of systems — radars, infrared search and track systems (IRST), electronic support measures, electronic warfare capabilities, engines, communications architecture, weapons, and more — would be the same. The Navy NGAD program, too, features a lot of commonality with the Air Force equivalent, especially when it comes to the elements mentioned here. In the past, TWZ considered whether the Air Force might choose a highly modular design to achieve different versions of the fighter, although Hunter's more recent words would seem to suggest at least the possibility of more distinct iterations, which might not even be from the same manufacturer. Even before this point, there was a broader discussion about a more rapid development of new fighter designs, something that now seems to be reflected in Hunter's outline of NGAD combat jet iterations. Most prominently, Hunter's predecessor as Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics, Will Roper, championed the so-called 'Digital Century Series.' Under this approach, new fighters were to be developed at increments of up to one every five years. Limiting service life to reduce cost and increase iterative production was also a major potential component of such a vision. The idea was always highly ambitious, as we have discussed before, but it was also always expected to play a central part in the NGAD program. Hunter's words could imply that, at least in some small part, this may now be the case. But it still seems highly unlikely that we will ever see all-new crewed fighter designs being churned out at such a prodigious rate. Overall, from what we know so far about the F-47, this component of the NGAD 'family of systems' does sound like it will be primarily a Raptor successor for the high-end fight, albeit one that is superior across its capabilities and which adds new functions such as drone-controller. However, the words of the former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics do at least point to thinking around additional versions of the NGAD combat jet. Perhaps the most likely scenario will involve successive production batches of the same basic F-47 design, but incorporating certain changes. Whether such designs will actually be realized remains to be seen, but for now, this is another tantalizing potential aspect of a program that is slowly starting to emerge from the shadows. Contact the author: thomas@
Yahoo
29-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Major F-47 Revelations Were Just Dropped By Former Air Force Secretary
Significant parts of the veil of secrecy over the origins of Boeing's F-47 sixth-generation stealth fighter, and the decisions and tradeoffs made along the way, have now been pulled back. New revelations about the future of the Air Force's next-generation combat jet plans, which might include additional tranches of different aircraft, have now emerged, as well. Former Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall and former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Andrew Hunter talked at length about the F-47 and the related Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) initiative, as well as early related research and development efforts, in the latest edition of Defense & Aerospace Report's Air Power Podcast. In the mid-2010s, Kendall, then Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, first started the ball rolling with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency-led Aerospace Innovation Initiative, which produced multiple flying demonstrator aircraft. The demonstrator aircraft are where the podcast's hosts Vago Muradian, editor-in-chief of Defense & Aerospace Report, and J.J. Gertler, director of The Defense Concepts Organization and senior analyst at the Teal Group, start the conversion with Kendall and Hunter, which is well worth listening to in full. TWZ has distilled down the main takeaways from the ensuing discussion, which are as follows The Aerospace Innovation Initiative was a $1 billion effort led by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), but that also included the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy. 'We hadn't finalized the configuration,' but 'there were certain desirable characteristics we were after' when the initiative started, according to Kendall. 'What we call X-planes, experimental aircraft' were designed and built 'to prove out the more risky and important technologies we were after,' he added. 'Really their intent was to prove out the characteristics of a platform of the nature of a sixth generation air dominance platform,' including unspecified 'capabilities, as well as range and other aspects you would expect with an aircraft,' Hunter said. 'Industrial base considerations had a lot to do with me starting the Aerospace Innovation Initiative. I wanted to reintroduce competition for tactical aircraft' after years of Lockheed Martin market dominance, especially with the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Kendall added. DARPA and the Air Force have previously confirmed that two X-planes were built for the Aerospace Innovation Initiative, and that they first flew in 2019 and 2022, respectively. Kendall has now added the detail that they were built sometime after 2017. Kendall also stressed that the demonstrators were entirely experimental demonstrator aircraft and not reflective of a production prototype for a 'tactical design.' 'We can tell you that they were not all built by the same company. They were competitive,' he noted. We know that Boeing and Lockheed both built demonstrators. The 'tactical' requirements for what eventually led to the F-47 were developed by the Air Force during President Donald Trump's first administration, per the former Secretary of the Air Force. A Program Executive Office for Advanced Aviation, which was stood up in 2019, was responsible for much of that work. It has since evolved into the Agile Development Office that manages the entire NGAD initiative. 'I think part of the reason to create a new office for advanced aircraft was [that] NGAD was envisioned as a different way of solving the problem' that 'wasn't necessarily looking for something or wasn't presupposing the answer was something that would look like a traditional fighter,' according to Hunter. The original NGAD combat jet requirements were centered heavily on the idea of a direct replacement for the F-22 Raptor to perform the 'job of going into a dense, highly protected airspace, and being able to penetrate and being able to establish your superiority, at least temporarily within over enemy territory,' Kendall said. The requirements subsequently evolved to put substantial emphasis on the 'quarterback role' controlling Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drones. Kendall described the F-47 as having, in very broad strokes, an 'aircraft configuration itself [that] is going to be [a] pretty direct descendant of F-22.' Hunter highlighted significant new networking capabilities, including for exchanging sensor data with other platforms, thanks to common underlying systems reference architecture, which will be found on the F-47. Hunter pointed out that the common architecture extends beyond the Air Force, and will help F-47 and the Navy's future F/A-XX next-generation combat jet be more 'seamlessly' interoperable with each other and other assets. The F-47 and whatever design is selected for F/A-XX are also set to leverage a pool of common subsystems, including advanced sensors and communications suites. Kendall also emphasized the significant amount of control that the U.S. government will exercise over the design and other intellectual property surrounding the jet, which could make it easier and faster to upgrade and otherwise evolve over time. 'We're not a prisoner of a prime [contractor], basically, for upgrades and for competing for modular components that can be added to replace other components as the life of the aircraft goes on,' the former Air Force secretary said. Kendall has been an outspoken critic of Lockheed Martin's dominance when it comes to the F-35 program, describing it as 'acquisition malpractice.' Kendall elaborated on three core factors that led to his decision to pause the NGAD combat jet program for a deep review last year. 'The one that led to the pause initially was we just didn't have enough money.' Kendall said that completing the research and development phase of the program will take at least another $20 billion, a figure he has publicly given in the past. 'We just couldn't do it unless we were going to be given more money, and there was no place to trade off left within the Air Force to fund it.' Secondly, the evolution of the CCA program called into question the core function of the NGAD combat jet and whether being able to perform the penetrating counter-air mission to the same degree was as critical. Kendall noted, as have other Air Force officials in recent months, that the review of the NGAD combat jet program determined that such an aircraft would be a key element to achieving air superiority in the future, especially in a high-end fight, with the lowest amount of risk. The third and last of the factors that contributed to the pause was questions about 'opportunity cost' and whether the NGAD combat jet program's high price point would prevent the Air Force from pursuing other critical efforts. Kendall said he had been willing to trade the NGAD combat jet for investments in new counter-space capabilities and improved base defenses. 'We need to move forward aggressively with counter-space. The Chinese were fielding tens or hundreds of satellites designed to target the joint force and enable long-range fires against the joint force. So we had to respond to that.' 'The Chinese have fielded literally thousands of weapons to attack those bases, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and hypersonics. So having an effective, cost-effective ability to defend them is very important.' To the latter point, the former Secretary of the Air Force highlighted a broad need for lower-cost alternatives to Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) surface-to-air interceptors to help defend against large barrages of threats. This underscores the Air Force's continued preference, at least publicly, to focus on improved and expanded active base defenses like surface-to-air missiles, rather than new hardened physical infrastructure. This is now a heated topic of debate that TWZ has been following closely. 'If we leave the joint force vulnerable to targeting from space by the Chinese, and if we leave our bases vulnerable to attack, the F-22s, the F-35s, and the F-47s will never get off the ground.' Kendall said he was unaware of what tradeoffs the Trump administration may have made or may be planning to make as part of the decision on the F-47. He also said that there was no indication that the core design of the F-47 had changed in any fundamental way from what it had been prior to the pause. Kendall said that the F-47 was the product of a very real competition and that Boeing and Lockheed Martin presented viable and distinctly different designs, though he said he could elaborate on the specifics. One company moved faster than the other to meet key milestones, but they both got there in the end, he added. 'These are new designs. They're aggressive designs. They've got a lot of new technologies are going to be integrated together,' according to Kendall. Hunter described both designs as 'quite creative.' Hunter, speaking generally, also noted that incumbent contractors (understood in this case to be Lockheed Martin given its previous win in the Joint Strike Fighter competition) can often come across as more risk averse while challengers are often willing to risk more. Kendall said more bluntly that the 'incentives may have been stronger for Boeing. In some ways, they needed to win this one more than Lockheed did.' Hunter separately indicated that Northrop Grumman was in line to be cut from the NGAD combat jet competition before the company announced what it described as a voluntary withdrawal in 2023. The F-47's unit cost is expected to be at least twice that of an F-35, or in the $160 million to $180 million range, based on publicly available information, according to Kendall. He has previously said the final price point could be 'multiple hundreds of millions of dollars.' In terms of the ultimate selection of the F-47, Kendall also notes that 'there isn't a readiness at this point, a confidence in the uncrewed aircraft to bet entirely on them, right? And I tend to share that view.' Kendall said he was doubtful any U.S. allies or partners would be willing to buy an export version of the F-47, especially given the expected unit cost and the potential for those jets to come with significant downgraded capabilities. Hunter noted that most successful large U.S. military acquisition programs do get to a point where export sales occur and that the fact that this didn't happen for F-22 was one of many factors that contributed to their high upfront and sustainment costs. Hunter also disclosed that the NGAD combat jet program, at least as it existed under his tenure, was expecting to see multiple iterative tranches in the same vein as what is happening in the CCA drone program. The F-47 may just be 'Increment 1' of a family of NGAD combat jet designs. Kendall also stressed that F-47 is not a silver-bullet solution to achieving air superiority and advocated for continued investment in the CCA program and the Block 4 upgrade effort for the F-35. Much still remains to be learned about the F-47 and the full extent of the ramifications that continuing with the program will have for the Air Force and its future force structure. We do now have a much fuller picture of the service arrived its choice for its next-generation stealth fighter. Contact the author: joe@
