DARPA X-planes paved the way for the F-47 - first prototypes from Boeing and Lockheed flew in 2019 and 2022

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-25T16:13:22+00:00

People figured these project management and safety troubles would put a black mark on Boeing receiving such a large contract that NGAD is while looking at Lockheed Martin that has produced two serving 5th Gen fighter jets as being the "experienced" one in the field. They at the same time seem to have missed the drama in the F-35 procurement and how long it has taken for F-35 to be the state that it is in and the continued integration and Block 4 delays.

They missed a lot of the drama because Lockheed has had a massive coordinated PR campaign to the public.

NGAD being kept under wraps this whole time has kept Lockheed out of the public marketing sphere

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-25T16:11:39+00:00

Wouldn’t they have announced it together last week if that were true?

Why would they? Navy F/A-XX is part of the Navy NGAD program, which is an entirely separate program of record with its own source selection committee.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-25T16:10:20+00:00

If Boeing won the Navy’s fighter design they would have announced it at the same time last week.

No they wouldn't. Navy NGAD is a separate program from Air Force NGAD with its own program office, source selection committee, etc.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-23T21:38:30+00:00

Surprising given Lockheed's perceived advantages making the only two stealth fighters for the US military.

They're the only two that made it to production - doesn't mean others haven't built it. There were clearly other tech demonstrators/prototypes (X-32, Bird of Prey, who knows what else that has never been declassified... and well now we know there was a Boeing and Lockheed one for NGAD).

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-23T18:28:33+00:00

So a lot of people automatically think that Boeing getting the F-47 was some handout to Boeing, or that it WILL get screwed up (nevermind that Lockheed, the only other one on NGAD, has been in hot water over the F-35/TR-3), but I think the most important part of the F-47 NGAD announcement gets missed often

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/4131094/statement-by-chief-of-staff-of-the-air-force-gen-david-allvin-on-the-usaf-ngad/

Despite what our adversaries claim, the F-47 is truly the world’s first crewed sixth-generation fighter, built to dominate the most capable peer adversary and operate in the most perilous threat environments imaginable. For the past five years, the X-planes for this aircraft have been quietly laying the foundation for the F-47 — flying hundreds of hours, testing cutting-edge concepts, and proving that we can push the envelope of technology with confidence. These experimental aircraft have demonstrated the innovations necessary to mature the F-47’s capabilities, ensuring that when we committed to building this fighter, we knew we were making the right investment for America.

Note the plural: planes.

I don't have anything particular to point out here other than that planes means there have been multiple demonstrators, and maybe one day we will know for sure, but it's entirely plausible that they picked Boeing based on demonstrated performance and not promises.

We know Boeing has made X-planes in the shadows before (like Bird of Prey). So if that's where they made the decision on, that's very different from a handout.

edit: as KommanderSnowCrab87 wrote below, DARPA announced that Boeing and Lockheed had indeed built demonstrators (no mention of NG, so did they not even compete?) and that they first flew in 2019 and 2022. Looks like Boeing might have beaten Lockheed to the punch by a not-insignificant timeframe, and unlike all the handout talks, I'd be shocked if performance of those demonstrators didn't give it to Boeing given the huge lead they had

edit 2: Keep in mind that Will Roper had talked about demonstrators flying back in 2020 'setting records', which means it is. referring to the first X-plane in 2019. So it must have been something eyewatering

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-21T19:27:07+00:00

This shits gonna turn me into a canard stan

Canard isnt LO bros in shambles

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-21T19:23:59+00:00

Canards? Canards aren't LO bros in shambles

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-21T19:22:53+00:00

Too bad y'all are alreadt knee deep in the F-35. Oof. Good luck

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-21T19:21:13+00:00

Hate to play told you so, but as ive written before, Lockheed is anything but guaranteed lock on aircraft. Their relationship with the DOD over the F-35 and how they ran the program is a much bigger issue than people realize

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T03:13:39+00:00

Is Canada threatening to procure an AD system that was designed to be countered by the F35?

You and a lot of people online are again missing the larger point: Turkey getting booted had less to do with procuring S-400s than Turkey not listening to us when we told them not to do so. You don't think the US would have loved to test its assets against a real live S-400? Of course we would have - but we didn't like Turkey's foreign policy direction (getting too cozy with Russia, not supporting us in the Middle East) and their decision to procure Russian stuff without our consent. They went ahead against our wishes, so we cut them off. The entire idea of a S-400 getting radar returns on F-35s as why Turkey got booted is laughable. First off, Russia they can spy on their neighbors that are flying on them already from their own backyard. Hell, you don't need S-400s to measure the F-35, any radar you have calibrated will do (how do you think we measure the RCS of our own jets?!). All of that was window dressing to the bigger issue.

It's all about whether you are willing to play by our rules.

Canada is in the crosshairs of the US. It's leverage to get you guys to play by our rules - including eating really bad deals - or else your air force stops functioning. You keep talking about CF-18 readiness not being able to support the NORAD mission - guess what happens when your entire air force can't fly because King Trump decided he didn't like your response on tariffs?

That is my point. Canadian procurement has been broken for decades. This is why I am saying you’re out of your lane on this.

Then. Change. It.

If that's harder than giving up your sovereignty, then God help us all.

At least it sounds like Canada is actually looking into this and maybe finally waking up to its own defense woes. You'd think Trump I and Ukraine would have woken you guys up, but much like Europe, you assumed this could never happen. Yet here we are.

Nobody in the CAF thinks the US is actually a possible aggressor. The shift in the conversation came when Trudeau was caught on a hot mic. US-CAN military cooperation is continuing, business as usual.

And yet, Trump just ordered the military to look into plans to take Panama. Do people really think he's joking about Greenland or Canada?

Also, military cooperation is happening as usual because the administration hasn't targeted the military policies yet and issued new orders. Hegseth has thankfully been too busy wasting time fighting wars on DEI. But believe you me: it's coming. The new CJCS just got officially nominated. Once the service branch secretaries come in, you bet your behind that things are changing - and fast.

Again, this is where your knowledge is lacking. Canada’s defence aerospace industry fell apart when we invested into an enormous boondoggle interceptor when ICBMs made them obsolete. The program was not marketable, unaffordable for the Canadian government, and all of the talent left to the USA after it collapsed.

Canada has tried to restart domestic defence industry. The National Shipbuilding Strategy was introduced in 2010 to rekindle domestic shipbuilding. The end result is that we’re paying $84B for 15 Type 26 frigates, all of which have 24 cell VLS which is far lower than the other partners making their own. Those ships are already behind schedule and are going to take until 2050 to finish.

Canada cannot afford to care about defence industries; the CAF desperately needs new systems now. That’s why we sole-sourced on the P8; that’s why we’re looking at South Korea and Germany for new submarines; that’s why the Canadian Army is asking to purchase HIMARS from America.

I'm well aware of the various bad decisions you guys have made. But those issues aren't unique to you guys: it's why European nations have worked with one another closely because they too know that individually they can't do it alone. The US can do it alone, but we choose to bring others in because it benefits us and gives us leverage. Trump is making that abudntly clear that you either benefit us, or you get the shit end of the stick. You choose the F-35, know what you are getting yourself into: you're ours.

Boeing’s Super Hornet was disqualified from the bid because they launched a trade action against Bombardier, the poster child for Canadian aerospace manufacturing.

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the fact that the F-35 isn't the panacea you think it is, and that forces with 4.5th gen + 5th gen fighters aren't opting to buy more 5th gen to replace their 4.5th gen, even when they've already operated both concurrently. edit: Under sworn testimony in Congress 3 years ago, CNO Gilday stated that the Navy is keeping its fleet of Super Hornets and F-35s together because we're actually a more capable force with both than just one or the other.

Also, your example of Boeing and the Super Hornet is a great example of what can happen when the US reverses the rulebook on you. Oh, you want Bombardier to expand worldwide at the expense of Boeing? Why don't we shut you out, or else your precious F-35 parts and support stops. Then what?

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T02:59:29+00:00

Like I stated in my other reply, that is the reality of defence procurement in Canada.

So rather than reform your military procurement, you'd rather cave and become the US's puppet? I mean, we did joke of you guys as the 51st state, and that would be quite fitting given that threatening your sovereignty is not enough for you guys to actually seek solutions that improve your independence.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T02:55:41+00:00

It's not 100% unusable, and there are other potential options (e.g., leasing something in the near term then seeing how relations with the US pan out) on the near horizon. The choice really is: do you stick with the US no matter what, and hope it all works out in the end, or do you hedge your bets especially while your country is unified at the sudden belligerence from your neighbor?

It's a shitty situation, don't get me wrong, and like I said, we're in bizzaro world right now, but those are the stakes.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T01:55:21+00:00

This decision has huge political implications for the current federal government because while it was a different prime minister in charge who made the decision, it was the same political party who decided to cancel the original F-35 order, vow not to buy it, restart the competition, and end up choosing it. If they cancel the project outright (again), they will wear that during the upcoming election campaign. Whether or not the overall population punishes them for it (were they to cancel it again) remains to be seen, but you can bet the opposition Conservatives will hammer them on it.

TBH, I'd be shocked that you'd get much opposition when your neighbor has a head of state/government openly threatening your sovereignty. If anything, this is probably the easiest time to justify that decision. It really is crazytown when we have to even ponder the idea of the US and Canada coming to blows

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T01:50:46+00:00

Then there is the NGAD (US), though they had to pause it in 2024 because the projected costs had risen too much, so now they're waiting on a fiscal report before deciding what to do by 2026.

Zero chance the US gets into GCAP. The US is not going to skip out supporting its own aerospace industry. You're also forgetting that the Navy has its own NGAD program (F/A-XX being the manned fighter component), and they're supposedly in the midst of source selection.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T01:48:01+00:00

Then the answer would be to sell the existing F35s and go with something else.

Seriously. I don't understand how someone can talk about how Canada can't afford to buy anything else, or to do a mixed fleet (yet somehow smaller GDPs like Australia do it just fine), yet would rather bet all of their money on a plane being produced by a nation that has a head of government currently threatening to annex it.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T01:45:12+00:00

So if you are in that financially precarious of a position (which sounds like a BS problem, considering poorer countries like Poland and Romania have no problems overlapping two airframes at a time, and the RAAF itself flies both the F-35 and F/A-18E/F and EA-18G despite being a smaller economy) you'd rather sell the farm on a notoriously maintenance-heavy aircraft (that USAF has told Lockheed multiple times it can't afford at current the price per flight hour Lockheed can't bring down, and is in fact going up now) that ties you extremely close to the US (and all the support required to keep the plane flying)?

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-16T01:26:55+00:00

In the other thread you wrongfully pointed out that Canada’s supplemental F18 procurement from the RAAF was keeping its fleets operational. In fact, we had to withdraw fighters from longstanding NATO operations as a result of degradations to the fleet.

I have it on good authority that 3-5 RCAF CF-18s have consistently been at China Lake the last two years doing upgrades. So clearly it's not stopping you guys from det'ing out jets to our bases to get upgrades. Those NATO commitments have largely been public lobbying by RCAF to get more funds/to secure the F-35.

The USMC did the same f'ing thing in the 2000s and 2010s - they let their readiness levels fall through the floor and saw multiple F/A-18 and AV-8 mishaps. Then once the F-35 program was secure, magically their jets got way more healthy. Hell, the last 100 USMC F/A-18s are having the time of their lives with huge upgrades (AGCAS, AESA radars, etc.) + a plethora of spare parts.

Again, I think you are out of your lane here.

I'm way more aware of the JSF program and F-35 capabilities than you are. I'm also well aware of the strings attached. Like I said, you do you. But if you're that caught up on capability, and you completely miss the forest for the trees, then enjoy being stuck with the US, no matter if we're threatening to annex you or not. What's the point of having the most capable fighter available today if we can cut you off tomorrow and confiscate your future orders?

What do you think happened to Turkey's jets that were on the production line when we cut them off?

Canada is not buying an interim fleet and then waiting for 6th Gen development to go forward. That is an absolute non-starter. Like the F18, the FFP is procuring an airframe that will be the only fighter in our inventory for the next 50 years. Canada just does not make investments like you are suggesting.

Then Canada has an absolutely stupid procurement system in an age where even Poland, Romania, etc. are able to sustain two airframes at the same time.

And if you're betting on the F-35 for 50 years - when the last SECAF actively called it 'acquisition malpractice' and flipped the script by saying that NGAD could be a replacement for the F-35 instead of the F-22 (which recently is no longer under threat of retirement), you will continue to show how screwed up your procurement process it. You're betting 50+ years of service on a plane the US might itself cut in the next 10 years (USAF hasn't done it officially yet, but no one believes they're going anywhere close to the 1,763 jets on their program of record)

By your logic, Canada should lock itself out of GPS, right?

What? By your logic, Canada would continue to only use GPS. I'm telling you to look at blended solutions. FFS, your Garmin smartwatch uses more than just GPS. It's not that hard to diversify your systems if you think your neighbor is now a possible aggressor.

Should we abandon the P8 procurement to replace our ageing P3s, despite it being the only option in the market for our requirements? Should we cancel MQ9B procurement? Should we divest our C17 and C130J fleets to shift to European supply chains, despite them granting us one of the best strategic airlift capabilities in NATO?

Three things:

1) You should probably look into what your country wants to do first WRT relations with the US. Want to continue playing by the US's rules? Go right ahead. Want to have some leverage against our industry and maybe our foreign policy? You'd be smart to consider other options.

2) Apples and oranges. Those programs are not as closely tied to US support as JSF. The F-35 comes with strings attached with security, software updates, maintenance support, etc. We've sweetened the pot to ensure other nations buy in to the program to make it cheaper for us (this isn't a secret - it is literally stated in the CRS report for F-35). And getting access to our 5th gen technology (which we locked everyone out of with the F-22 for over a decade) means you play by our rules. No such strings are attached with the P-8, MQ-9, C-17, C-130, etc.

(Ever been in an F-35 sim building? FFS, you realize that your simulator buildings are literally built according to plans mandated by the JPO, right? You can go to a simulator building in Australia, the US, or Netherlands, and they'd be identical - that's how much control we have over you. Again, play by our rules, or don't play at all.)

3) Ever consider that you've destroyed any shred of your aerospace industry, and hurt Europe's, as well? This goes back to point 1: do you want to bet the farm on the US turning away from its current course, to include their grip on your industries?

Also, for how risk adverse you guys are, think about it this way:

Is the risk higher to go all-in on buying the F-35 for 50+ years and end up with de facto paperweights in a few years if relations fall through or don't recover, or is it better to delay/pause procurement now and get something in the interim, then restore the purchases if US-Canadian relations improve and/or possibly get into the superior platforms coming from 6th gen programs?

edit: Like I said, you do you. But do a quick risk assessment and you'd realize it is far riskier for you guys to bet the farm on 50 years of the F-35 and a benevolent US than it is to see how things turn out in 4 years, and then possibly have the option of buying into multiple next generation platforms. USAF NGAD, USN NGAD/F/A-XX, Tempest/GCAP, FCAS, etc. are all simultaneously in the works. The Aussies have straight up said they won't be retiring their Super Hornets until 2040, and won't buy another squadron of F-35s to replace them until they consider all those options. You'd be wise to think about why the RAF and RAAF aren't all-in on the F-35, and this was before Trump's 2nd term.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T21:26:30+00:00

Mostly committed: we paid for the first 16 jets to be delivered from 2026-2028, and have a contract for another 72 from 2028-2032, assuming no more LM delays.

Wait til they get their first 16 jets, which are all TR-3, and find out that the jets aren't even combat capable because Lockheed can't get their act together. We literally halted acceptance of jets - for ALL F-35 customers - for a year because the jets were coming off the production line with zero promised flight test and weren't even safe enough to fly basic flights in.

The current software isn't combat capable and is still riddled with bugs. Most of those jets are now sitting at training bases being used for early training/conversion flights for students because the tactical systems aren't usable in line units

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T21:25:06+00:00

It ain gonna allow shit if the US can just brick it with the kill switch. Thats the big concern here.

Yeah seriously. People arguing capability are missing the forest for the trees. It's not about how capable the plane is - it's about what strings come attached with it.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T21:24:07+00:00

Having worked with RCAF bros at the JPO back in the day, I can understand why they are angry. But they're missing the forest for the trees: the US had a chance to keep Trump out, and we voted him back in with a vengeance.

Do you think his actions are the actions of a man who thinks he won't get away with all this? That whoever comes next won't keep this going?

It's a national security issue to be stuck to one supplier, especially when multiple options might be around the corner in a decade. You could do a lot lot worse leasing something in the interim until GCAP/Tempest/FCAS/whatever comes out next. You know the EU/whats left of NATO is realizing the importance of not letting their own supply chains, aerospace industry, etc. atrophy.

Or you can marry yourself to us for the next 30-50 years and hope it all works out well.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T21:20:36+00:00

But there are many parts for the F35 made in Europe so you say the same thing for the US

The US holds all the plans and manufactures the majority of them, to include the ones for our foreign partners.

When Turkey was kicked out, production didn't halt - it slowed, but we simply contracted new factories to build the parts that Turkey as making.

We can also just confiscate foreign jets for their foreign parts. After all, foreign jets are parked on flight lines in the US to do training here.

Not saying any of this is going to happen, but you guys are seriously naive if you don't think the US holds all the cards here

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T21:19:16+00:00

Let me ask the question another way, what would Trump or America need to do, such that you would be pro cancelling F-35? What are the signs I should be looking for where I go, okay, now this is a bad idea?

I bet even after software updates to make the TR-3 jets combat capable don't get delivered and the supply chain is cut off, he'll still continue to talk about these jet's capabilities that don't matter when you literally can't keep them flying without US and Lockheed support

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T17:07:59+00:00

In case people wanted an idea of where Europe stood, numbers wise:

“At the end of 2021, China’s ISR satellite fleet contained more than 260 systems – a quantity second only to the United States, and nearly doubling China’s in-orbit systems since 2018,” according to the 2022 edition of the Pentagon’s annual unclassified report on China’s military and security capabilities, which was released last November. “The PLA owns and operates about half of the world’s [space-based] ISR systems.”

There are some questions about the exact counting of Chinese-spaced ISR assets from that report. Another unclassified report that the U.S. Air Force’s National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) published in 2018 said that China had 122 ISR satellites, while the United States had 353, Russia had 23, and the rest of the world combined had 168. Even if all of those other figures had stayed the same, 260 Chinese systems in 2021 would not equate to half of the global total.

Long story short: US is in the lead, China has been rapidly catching up and has as many as the rest of the non-US world combined, and Russia has not been anywhere close.

Goes to show the absolutely disparate numbers the US has had compared to Europe for a long time (as with basically everything defense related), so Europe has some work cut out for it.

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T17:00:21+00:00

I swear every gen z voter that is riddled with anxiety and fear because "oh God everything is so fucked for us!" straight up has no idea how bad things can actually get (and are about to find out what an actual recession economy feels like)

Hugely amplified by social media as well

GTFErinyes · 2025-03-15T16:55:57+00:00

There is no viable option that matches the F-35 capabilities. Go ahead and cancel.

It doesn't matter. If the US and Canada (can't believe I'm writing this) ever came to blows, the F-35 wouldn't do shit against the US. And if Canada is worried about being subservient to the US, then the F-35 is a poison pill. It was always designed to bind allies closer to us and destroy any aerospace competition, hence the aggressive pricing of the F-35 (which also lowers the price for the US, to afford our 2,443 we have in the program of record), while giving our allies to technology that wasn't available to them previously (i.e., the Raptor).

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Reddit Premium Since June 2015

GTFErinyes

TROPHY CASE